Connect with us

Local

Sexual assault may be dropped in Wone murder case

The lead prosecutor in the Robert Wone murder case startled courtroom
 spectators last

Published

on

The lead prosecutor in the Robert Wone murder case startled courtroom
 spectators last week when he said the government would likely drop its theory that Wone was immobilized by a paralytic drug and
 sexually assaulted before being stabbed to death in the Dupont Circle
 home of three gay men.

The disclosure by Assistant U.S. Attorney Glenn Kirschner at 
a D.C. Superior Court hearing March 12 drew visible sighs of relief from 
defendants Joseph Price, Victor Zaborsky and Dylan Ward. Price gave a
 thumbs-up signal to his attorney, Bernard Grimm.

“This appears to be a major victory for the defense,” said D.C.
 attorney Dale Sanders, who practices criminal law in the District.

Sanders said that by withdrawing its earlier contention that Wone was
 sexually assaulted and drugged, prosecutors would make it easier for
 the defense to promote their own contention that an unidentified 
intruder killed Wone after entering the home of the three gay men 
through a rear door.

The men have been indicted on charges of obstruction of justice,
 conspiracy to obstruct justice, and evidence tampering in connection
 with the August 2006 murder. Authorities have yet to charge anyone 
with the murder itself. The trial is scheduled to begin May 10.

Kirschner told D.C. Superior Court Judge Lynn Leibovitz that 
prosecutors were still considering introducing other evidence at trial 
considered highly controversial: a collection of S&M sex toys seized by 
police from Ward’s bedroom, which prosecutors have said was located
 across the hall from where Wone was found stabbed in a second-floor
 guest bedroom.

Wone, a prominent Washington attorney, was friends with the three men 
and spending the night at their home after working late in his
 downtown office, the men and members of Wone’s family have said. Wone
 was married to a woman, and his family members said he was straight.

Leibovitz said she had yet to see sufficient evidence presented by 
prosecutors to justify the introduction of the “devices” at trial. She 
noted that defense attorneys presented arguments as to why such 
evidence was not relevant to the case and how it would be prejudicial to the jury.

She directed prosecutors to file a motion before April 2 explaining 
their rationale for introducing such evidence and said she would rule
 on its admissibility at that time.

Leibovitz denied a motion by the defense asking the court to order
 prosecutors to release more details surrounding their evidence and 
theories in the case, saying the government has complied with all
 “discovery” requirements for informing the defense of its evidence.

Last week’s hearing followed a court motion filed by prosecutors in
 February seeking permission to introduce evidence at trial that Price,
 Zaborsky and Ward engaged in possible criminal conduct not 
identified in the charges pending against them. Some of the alleged
 conduct cited in the court filing pertained to the use of S&M-related
 restraining devices as well as devices used to administer electrical
 shocks to a person’s genitals.

“Are you planning to tell the jury that he was sexually assaulted, 
restrained,” that sex toys were used on him and he was injected with 
something? Leibovitz asked Kirschner.

“We’re moving away from the sexual assault proof,” Kirschner replied. But he said prosecutors still planned to offer some evidence that
 “restraints” were found in Ward’s bedroom.

In response to another assertion made by prosecutors in their February
 court filing — that “the killer is someone known to and being
 protected” by Price, Zaborsky and Ward — Leibovitz asked Kirschner,
” Do you plan to say one or all of these men killed Wone?”

“Not directly,” Kirschner replied.

He said prosecutors also plan to present evidence from the autopsy of
 needle marks on Wone’s body, including marks he noted the government’s
 medical experts would show were not made by emergency medical 
technicians who arrived at the scene and tried to revive Wone.

Kirschner disclosed at the hearing that he had submitted a letter to 
the defense earlier in the day, which he also filed with the court,
 saying that the government obtained new information from medical 
experts that appeared to raise doubts over whether Wone had been
 sexually assaulted or immobilized by a paralytic drug.

Authorities first raised that theory 
in a lengthy criminal complaint filed at the time police brought
 criminal charges against the three men for obstruction of justice and
 evidence tampering.

The complaint cited an autopsy finding showing that Wone suffered
 three surgical-like, clean stab wounds in the chest and abdomen that 
could only have occurred if he were lying completely still. The
 complaint, and subsequent arguments by prosecutors, claimed that a 
person being stabbed would be expected to recoil in pain or move in a
 defensive way, causing the wounds to be jagged or distorted.

Prosecutors said a paralytic drug must have been administered to
 Wone to render him immobile, but they acknowledged that the autopsy 
and subsequent chemical tests could not find traces of such a drug in 
Wone’s body. They argued that the type of anesthesia-like drug in
 question usually dissipates quickly and cannot be detected in tests.

But defense attorneys say in their own court filings that they
 would present expert witnesses to show that such drugs are detectable
 in tests, and the government’s inability to detect such a drug shows 
it was never administered.

According to prosecutors, the sexual assault theory was based on 
another finding in the autopsy that traces of Wone’s semen were 
found inside his rectum. The defense later argued that its own experts 
would show that the semen had no sperm cells, indicating it was 
secreted naturally by the body after Wone died, as muscles relax during 
the post mortem processes.

Sanders said that although the apparent decision by prosecutors to put aside their earlier sexual assault and paralytic drug theory is a blow to the prosecutors’ case, other evidence obtained against the three men remains significant and strong.

He noted, among other things, that investigators found traces of blood in the lint trap of the men’s clothes dryer and in a drain outside the house; findings by evidence technicians that someone cleaned the crime scene by attempting to wipe blood spattered near the body; and that the bloody kitchen knife that the men said they found near Wone’s body bore fibers from a towel, indicating to evidence experts that Wone’s blood was wiped onto knife blade by someone, with another knife likely used to kill Wone.

Authorities also have said Wone appeared to have been dead a significant period of time before Zaborsky called 911 to report a stabbing; and rescue workers reported finding very little blood on Wone’s chest and body, indicating that someone cleaned the body before police and rescue workers were called, according to the police affidavit.

“They won this battle, but the war doesn’t look good for them,” Sanders said. “You can’t lose track of the big picture, which doesn’t look good for these guys.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

D.C. Council gives first approval to amended PrEP insurance bill

Removes weakening language after concerns raised by AIDS group

Published

on

‘This is a win in the fight against HIV/AIDS,’ said Council member Zachary Parker. (File photo courtesy of Earline Budd)

The D.C. Council voted unanimously on Feb. 3 to approve a bill on its first of two required votes that requires health insurance companies to cover the costs of HIV prevention or PrEP drugs for D.C. residents at risk for HIV infection.

 The vote to approve the PrEP D.C. Amendment Act came immediately after the 13-member Council voted unanimously again to approve an amendment that removed language in the bill added last month by the Council’s Committee on Health that would require insurers to fully cover only one PrEP drug.

The amendment, introduced jointly by Council members Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), who first introduced the bill in February 2025, and Christina Henderson (I-At-Large), who serves as chair of the Health Committee, requires insurers to cover all U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved PrEP drugs.  

Under its rules, the D.C. Council must vote twice to approve all legislation, which must be signed by the D.C. mayor and undergo a 30-day review by Congress before it takes effect as a D.C. law.

Given its unanimous “first reading” vote of approval on Feb. 3, Parker told the Washington Blade he was certain the Council would approve the bill on its second and final vote expected in about two weeks.

Among those who raised concerns about the earlier version of the bill was Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, who sent messages to all 13 Council members urging them to remove the language added by the Committee on Health requiring insurers to cover just one PrEP drug.

The change made by the committee, Schmidt told Council members, “would actually reduce PrEP options for D.C. residents that are required by current federal law, limit patient choice, and place D.C. behind states that have enacted HIV prevention policies designed to remain in effect regardless of any federal changes.”

Schmid told the Washington Blade that although coverage requirements for insurers are currently provided through coverage standards recommended in the U.S. Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, AIDS advocacy organizations have called on D.C. and states to pass their own legislation requiring insurance coverage of PrEP in the event that the federal policies are weakened or removed by the Trump administration, which has already reduced or ended federal funding for HIV/AIDS-related programs.

“The sticking point was the language in the markup that insurers only had to cover one regimen of PrEP,” Parker told the Blade in a phone interview the night before the Council vote. “And advocates thought that moved the needle back in terms of coverage access, and I agree with them,” he said.

In anticipation that the Council would vote to approve the amendment and the underlying bill, Parker, the Council’s only gay member, added, “I think this is a win for our community. And this is a win in the fight against HIV/AIDS.”

During the Feb. 3 Council session, Henderson called on her fellow Council members to approve both the amendment she and Parker had introduced and the bill itself. But she did not say why her committee approved the changes that advocates say weakened the bill and that her and Parker’s amendment would undo. Schmid speculated that pressure from insurance companies may have played a role in the committee change requiring coverage of only one PrEP drug. 

“My goal for advancing the ‘PrEP DC Amendment Act’ is to ensure that the District is building on the progress made in reducing new HIV infections every year,” Henderson said in a statement released after the Council vote. “On Friday, my office received concerns from advocates and community leaders about language regarding PrEP coverage,” she said.

“My team and I worked with Council member Parker, community leaders, including the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute and Whitman-Walker, and the Department of Insurance, Securities, and Banking, to craft a solution that clarifies our intent and provides greater access to these life-saving drugs for District residents by reducing consumer costs for any PrEP drug approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,” her statement concludes.

In his own statement following the Council vote, Schmid thanked Henderson and Parker for initiating the amendment to improve the bill. “This will provide PrEP users with the opportunity to choose the best drug that meets their needs,” he said. “We look forward to the bill’s final reading and implementation.”

Continue Reading

Maryland

4th Circuit dismisses lawsuit against Montgomery County schools’ pronoun policy

Substitute teacher Kimberly Polk challenged regulation in 2024

Published

on

(Photo by Sergei Gnatuk via Bigstock)

A federal appeals court has ruled Montgomery County Public Schools did not violate a substitute teacher’s constitutional rights when it required her to use students’ preferred pronouns in the classroom.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision it released on Jan. 28 ruled against Kimberly Polk.

The policy states that “all students have the right to be referred to by their identified name and/or pronoun.”

“School staff members should address students by the name and pronoun corresponding to the gender identity that is consistently asserted at school,” it reads. “Students are not required to change their permanent student records as described in the next section (e.g., obtain a court-ordered name and/or new birth certificate) as a prerequisite to being addressed by the name and pronoun that corresponds to their identified name. To the extent possible, and consistent with these guidelines, school personnel will make efforts to maintain the confidentiality of the student’s transgender status.”

The Washington Post reported Polk, who became a substitute teacher in Montgomery County in 2021, in November 2022 requested a “religious accommodation, claiming that the policy went against her ‘sincerely held religious beliefs,’ which are ‘based on her understanding of her Christian religion and the Holy Bible.’”

U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman in January 2025 dismissed Polk’s lawsuit that she filed in federal court in Beltsville. Polk appealed the decision to the 4th Circuit.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Norton hailed as champion of LGBTQ rights

D.C. congressional delegate to retire after 36 years in U.S. House

Published

on

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton announced she will not seek re-election; her term ends January 2027. (Washington Blade file photo by Drew Brown)

LGBTQ rights advocates reflected on D.C. Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton’s longstanding advocacy and support for LGBTQ rights in Congress following her decision last month not to run for re-election this year. 

Upon completing her current term in office in January 2027, Norton, a Democrat, will have served 18 two-year terms and 36 years in her role as the city’s non-voting delegate to the U.S. House.

LGBTQ advocates have joined city officials and community leaders in describing Norton as a highly effective advocate for D.C. under the city’s limited representation in Congress where she could not vote on the House floor but stood out in her work on House committees and moving, powerful speeches on the House floor.

 “During her more than three decades in Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton has been a champion for the District of Columbia and the LGBTQ+ community,” said David Stacy, vice president of government affairs for the Human Rights Campaign, the D.C.-based national LGBTQ advocacy organization.

“When Congress blocked implementation of D.C.’s domestic partnership registry, Norton led the fight to allow it to go into effect,” Stacey said. “When President Bush tried to ban marriage equality in every state and the District, Norton again stood up in opposition. And when Congress blocked HIV prevention efforts, Norton worked to end that interference in local control,” he said.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) (Washington Blade photo by Jeff Surprenant)

In reflecting the sentiment of many local and national LGBTQ advocates familiar with Norton’s work, Stacy added, “We have been lucky to have such an incredible champion. As her time in Congress comes to an end, we honor her extraordinary impact in the nation’s capital and beyond by standing together in pride and gratitude.”

Norton has been among the lead co-sponsors and outspoken supporters of LGBTQ rights legislation introduced in Congress since first taking office, including the currently pending Equality Act, which would ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. 

Activists familiar with Norton’s work also point out that she has played a lead role in opposing and helping to defeat anti-LGBTQ legislation. In 2018, Norton helped lead an effort to defeat a bill called the First Amendment Defense Act introduced by U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), which Norton said included language that could “gut” D.C.’s Human Rights Act’s provisions banning LGBTQ discrimination.

Norton pointed to a provision in the bill not immediately noticed by LGBTQ rights organizations that would define D.C.’s local government as a federal government entity and allow potential discrimination against LGBTQ people based on a “sincerely held religious belief.”

“This bill is the latest outrageous Republican attack on the District, focusing particularly on our LGBT community and the District’s right to self-government,” Norton said shortly after the bill was introduced. “We will not allow Republicans to discriminate against the LGBT community under the guise of religious liberty,” she said. Records show supporters have not secured the votes to pass it in several congressional sessions.

In 2011, Norton was credited with lining up sufficient opposition to plans by some Republican lawmakers to attempt to overturn D.C.’s same-sex marriage law, that the Council passed and the mayor signed in 2010.   

In 2015, Norton also played a lead role opposing attempts by GOP members of  Congress to overturn another D.C. law protecting LGBTQ students at religious schools, including the city’s Catholic University, from discrimination such as the denial of providing meeting space for an LGBTQ organization.

More recently, in 2024 Norton again led efforts to defeat an attempt by Republican House members to amend the D.C. budget bill that Congress must pass to eliminate funding for the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs and to prohibit the city from using its funds to enforce the D.C. Human Rights Act in cases of discrimination against transgender people.

“The Republican amendment that would prohibit funds from being used to enforce anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination regulations and the amendment to defund the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ+ Affairs are disgraceful attempts, in themselves, to discriminate against D.C.’s LGBTQ+ community while denying D.C. residents the limited governance over their local affairs to which they are entitled,” Norton told the Washington Blade.

In addition to pushing for LGBTQ supportive laws and opposing anti-LGBTQ measures Norton has spoken out against anti-LGBTQ hate crimes and called on the office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. in 2020 to more aggressively prosecute anti-LGBTQ hate crimes.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton marches in the 1995 AIDS Walk. (Washington Blade archive photo by Clint Steib)

“There is so much to be thankful for Eleanor Holmes Norton’s many years of service to all the citizens and residents of the District of Columbia,” said John Klenert, a member of the board of the LGBTQ Victory Fund. “Whether it was supporting its LGBTQ+ people for equal rights, HIV health issues, home rule protection, statehood for all 700,000 people, we could depend on her,” he said.

Ryan Bos, executive director of Capital Pride Alliance, the group that organizes D.C.’s annual LGBTQ Pride events, called Norton a “staunch” LGBTQ community ally and champion for LGBTQ supportive legislation in Congress.

“For decades, Congresswoman Norton has marched in the annual Capital Pride Parade, showing her pride and using her platform to bring voice and visibility in our fight to advance civil rights, end discrimination, and affirm the dignity of all LGBTQ+ people” Bos said. “We will be forever grateful for her ongoing advocacy and contributions to the LGBTQ+ movement.”

Howard Garrett, president of D.C.’s Capital Stonewall Democrats, called Norton a “consistent and principled advocate” for equality throughout her career. “She supported LGBTQ rights long before it was politically popular, advancing nondiscrimination protections and equal protection under the law,” he said.

“Eleanor was smart, tough, and did not suffer fools gladly,” said Rick Rosendall, former president of the D.C. Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance. “But unlike many Democratic politicians a few decades ago who were not reliable on LGBTQ issues, she was always right there with us,” he said. “We didn’t have to explain our cause to her.”

Longtime D.C. gay Democratic activist Peter Rosenstein said he first met Norton when she served as chair of the New York City Human Rights Commission. “She got her start in the civil rights movement and has always been a brilliant advocate for equality,” Rosenstein said.

“She fought for women and for the LGBTQ community,” he said. “She always stood strong with us in all the battles the LGBTQ community had to fight in Congress. I have been honored to know her, thank her for her lifetime of service, and wish her only the best in a hard-earned retirement.”

Continue Reading

Popular