Connect with us

Local

Dan Choi convicted in White House protest case

Former Army Lt. breaks down in courtroom, vows to appeal verdict

Published

on

Dan Choi, White House, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, DADT, GetEqual, gay news, Washington Blade, Marion Ben Shalom
Dan Choi, White House, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, DADT, GetEqual, gay news, Washington Blade, Marion Ben Shalom

Choi supporters Diane Olson and Robin Tyler of Los Angeles (left) and Mariam Ben-Shalom of Milwaukee (front right) join Choi (center) in a rally outside the courthouse. Supporters, who packed the courtroom, gave Choi a standing ovation when the trial ended. (Washington Blade photo by Lou Chibbaro, Jr.)

A federal judge on Thursday found gay former Army Lt. Dan Choi guilty of a misdemeanor offense of disobeying a lawful order by police to disperse from the White House fence during a November 2010 protest against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge John Facciola issued his verdict and sentenced Choi to a $100 fine on the last day of a non-jury trial in a case that has dragged on for two-and-a-half years.

Choi and 12 others had handcuffed themselves to the White House fence at a time when the activists said President Obama and Congress weren’t doing enough to advance legislation to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law that barred gays from serving openly in the military.

The verdict and sentence came after an emotionally distraught Choi broke down and cried repeatedly during the five-hour court session on Thursday as more than 50 friends and supporters, many of whom came from throughout the country, looked on in a packed courtroom.

Choi began the day’s activities by leading a contingent of supporters to the White House, where they stood at the site of the White House fence before walking about a mile to the courthouse.

He and several of his supporters who are military veterans arrived at the courthouse wearing their military uniforms.

“I apologize for my emotions but I don’t apologize for my humanity,” Choi told Facciola as he represented himself without an attorney.

When Facciola pronounced Choi guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, Choi replied that he would appeal the verdict. When the judge announced the sentence would be limited to a $100 fine, which many of Choi’s supporters considered a rebuke to prosecutors, Choi shouted, “I refuse to pay it…Send me to jail.”

“You have a right to appeal,” Facciola said before adjourning the trial without responding to Choi’s assertion that he would not pay the fine.

“This trial began in August 2011 and was suspended, and what do you think Dan was doing for the next two years,” asked Choi’s friend, former Army Capt. James Pietrangelo, an attorney who provided Choi with legal help. “This case was basically crushing him to death. And you saw the result of his mental state in there today.”

Pietrangelo told supporters before the trial resumed on Thursday that Choi was struggling with a recurring bout of post-traumatic stress disorder. Choi has said in media interviews that the stress disorder stemmed from his combat duty in the Iraq war, where he served as an Arabic linguist and field engineer.

Choi emerged as a nationally recognized advocate for the repeal of DADT in 2009, when he came out as gay in an interview on the Rachel Maddow show while a member of the Army Reserves. Army authorities discharged him under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” a short time later.

Pietrangelo and other supporters of Choi have rallied behind Choi’s decision to fight what he has said was an effort by prosecutors, at the behest of the White House, to single him out for a harsher prosecution because of his criticism of the Obama administration on the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” issue.

Choi and his lawyers argued during the first week of the trial in August 2011 that prosecutors charged him and the other 12 protesters who handcuffed themselves to the White House fence under a federal rather than local D.C. regulation that carried a maximum sentence of six months in jail and $5,000 fine.

In nearly all previous civil disobedience arrests at the White House, protesters have been charged under a D.C. municipal regulation that carries no jail time and a small fine similar to a parking ticket, Choi’s attorneys argued.

Choi was the only one of the 13 people arrested in the November 2010 White House protest that did not agree to plead guilty to the charge in exchange for having the case dismissed if they weren’t arrested again at the White House within a four-month period.

Assistant United States Attorney Angela George, the lead prosecutor in the case, said during her closing arguments on Thursday that Choi’s political beliefs were irrelevant to the prosecution.

At an earlier stage of the trial she said prosecutors chose to charge Choi under the stricter federal regulation because he had two prior arrests at the White House related to protests against DADT, and the government has the discretion to adjust its charges for repeat offenders.

Observers of the early stage of Choi’s trial considered Facciola to be sympathetic to Choi’s contention that he was targeted for “selective” and “vindictive” prosecution because of his criticism of the Obama administration over DADT. In an important procedural ruling during the first week of the trial in August 2011, Facciola found that Choi and his lawyers presented sufficient evidence to move ahead with a vindictive prosecution defense.

But in a development considered highly unusual, prosecutor George filed a motion for a Writ of Mandamus to contest Facciola’s ruling. Following a special hearing on the issue, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Royce Lamberth overruled Facciola, ordering him not to allow Choi to pursue a vindictive or selective prosecution defense.

Choi and his attorneys responded by appealing Lamberth’s action to the U.S. Court of Appeals, putting in motion additional court hearings while the trial itself was put on hold.

After losing the appeal, Choi dismissed his lawyers, who had been providing pro bono representation, and announced he would represent himself going forward in an action known as pro se representation.

Over the past several months, Choi — with help from lawyers behind the scenes — introduced a flurry of procedural motions that Facciola denied. Choi also filed subpoenas to call 21 government and law enforcement officials, including Secret Service agents, to testify at the trial as defense witnesses. Facciola granted a series of motions by prosecutor George to quash the subpoenas for nearly all of the witnesses Choi sought to call.

At the trial on Thursday, Choi called just four witnesses, two U.S. Park Police officers who played a role in his arrest at the White House fence and two people who supported his defense – lesbian former Army Sgt. Mariam Ben-Shalom and Rev. C.T. Vivian, a nationally recognized civil rights leader and colleague of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. during the 1960s civil rights movement.

Choi asked Vivian on the witness stand about his philosophy on civil rights and what he thought about Choi’s arrest at the White House. Vivian acknowledged that he was not present at the protest in which Choi was arrested and could not offer an opinion.

“As far as I’m concerned, you were there in my heart,” Choi told him.

Ben-Shalom, who was among the protesters arrested with Choi at the 2010 White House protest, testified that she supports Choi’s First Amendment right to participate in such a protest.

Choi questioned U.S. Park Police Lt. Robert LaChance and Park Police Sgt. Timothy Hodge, who he called as witnesses to discuss the procedures and actions surrounding Choi’s arrest at the White House protest. Both played a role in Choi’s arrest. In response to Choi’s questions, the two said they did not single out Choi for his political beliefs and had no knowledge of whether higher ups at the Park Police sought to target Choi or any of the other protesters for their political views related to DADT.

Choi also pressed the officers on what he has claimed all along – that the order by police directed the protesters to leave the sidewalk in front of the White House when Choi and some of the others were standing on a ledge to which the White House fence is attached. In what Choi and his supporters acknowledge is a technicality, Choi has argued that he could not be legally charged with disobeying an order to leave the sidewalk if he was not on the sidewalk when the order was issued.

Facciola, however, said when handing down his verdict that prosecutor George established sufficient evidence through police witnesses that the order called on Choi and the other protesters to leave the area of the fence, not just the sidewalk.

One of the most dramatic moments of Thursday’s trial session came when Choi played a video, while LaChance was on the witness stand, of the 2009 interview of Choi by Rachel Maddow, in which Choi came out as gay. He said the video would provide evidence helpful to his case.

But with the lights dimmed in the courtroom and the video playing on several screens, Choi began to sob uncontrollably before shouting to the judge, “The defense rests!” He then called on Facciola to immediately begin the closing arguments for the trial.

Facciola responded by calling a recess for lunch, prompting Choi to lie on the courtroom floor yelling and cursing. At Facciola’s orders, two U.S. Marshals lifted Choi from the floor, carried him out of the courtroom and into an elevator. It couldn’t immediately be determined where they took Choi.

But when the trial resumed about two hours later, Choi returned to the courtroom with Ben-Shalom helping him walk. After George delivered her closing argument, Choi delivered a 40-minute closing argument in which he discussed his views on civil rights, religion, the First Amendment, the Iraq war and strife between Iraq’s Shiite and Sunni Muslim factions, among other topics that Choi said touched on his theme of justice and equality.

At various times during the trial and in his closing argument Choi spoke in Arabic.

“The lesson we learned today is we need to start taking care of our activists who are willing to stand up and fight back against injustice,” Ben-Shalom said after the trial ended. “Today we have as pure an example as I can ever come up with about the toll it takes on a human being to stand up and fight back,“ she said.

In addition to Ben-Shalom and Pietrangelo, out-of-town activists who came to the courthouse to support Choi were Ian Finkenbinder of Seattle and Michael Bedwell of San Francisco, who were among those who were arrested with Choi at the 2010 White House protest; marriage equality activists Robin Tyler and Diane Olson of Los Angeles; and California activist Robin McGehee, co-founder of the national LGBT direct action group GetEqual.

Dan Choi, GetEqual, DADT, Don't Ask Don't Tell, gay news, Washington Blade

Dan Choi and other ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal activists handcuffed themselves to the White House fence in 2010. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

D.C. LGBTQ community to gather for post-election dialogue

Dec. 12 event to address federal workers’ rights, immigration, more

Published

on

More than 80,000 people joined the 2017 Equality March for Unity & Pride following Donald Trump’s 2016 victory. As Trump prepares to return to power, the local community is gathering to talk resistance and resilience. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Several leading LGBTQ organizations in D.C. are coming together to make sense of the recent election and to discuss the future of advocacy and resilience as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office. 

With Republicans in firm control of the federal government after winning majorities in the House and Senate, many are concerned about attacks on the LGBTQ community, including Trump’s pledge to ban trans people from serving in the military. In addition, many LGBTQ federal workers have expressed concerns about being targeted for reassignment or termination, as outlined in Project 2025, a right-wing blueprint for Trump’s second term.

In response, D.C.’s LGBTQ community is coming together for an event on Thursday, Dec. 12, 6:30-8 p.m. at the Eaton Hotel (1201 K. St., N.W.) featuring an array of speakers who will address issues, including: anticipated policy shifts; community resilience strategies; legal rights; immigration advocacy; and federal workers’ rights. 

The event, titled, “Charting Our Future: LGBTQ+ Advocacy & Resilience in a Changing Landscape” is free; visit washingtonblade.com/future to RSVP.

The event is being hosted by the Washington Blade and includes community partners: the DC LGBTQ+ Budget Coalition, HME Consulting & Advocacy, Eaton DC, DC LGBTQ+ Community Center, Capital Pride Alliance, and the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ+ Affairs. Heidi Ellis of the DC LGBTQ+ Budget Coalition will moderate. A list of speakers will be released later this week.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Casa Ruby receiver files for bankruptcy

Jan. 21 deadline set for creditors, former employees to apply for reimbursement

Published

on

Ruby Corado is scheduled to be sentenced on Jan. 10. (Blade file photo)

In a little-noticed development, the Wanda Alston Foundation, which assumed control over the operations of the D.C. LGBTQ community services group Casa Ruby in August 2022 under a court-appointed receivership role, filed a petition on Aug. 27 of this year to place Casa Ruby in bankruptcy.

The petition, filed in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia, says Casa Ruby has estimated liabilities to at least 50 creditors of more than $1 million and estimated assets of between $0 and $50,000.

Nick Harrison, an attorney representing the Wanda Alston Foundation, which provides housing services to homeless LGBTQ youth, said Casa Ruby currently has no known financial assets, including cash.

He said the bankruptcy petition’s estimated assets of up to $50,000 are based on a pending lawsuit that the Alston Foundation filed against eight former Casa Ruby board members and Casa Ruby’s founder and former executive director Ruby Corado in December 2022. The lawsuit accuses the board of violating D.C.’s nonprofit corporation law by failing to exercise oversight over Casa Ruby’s operations that led to its financial collapse and shutdown in 2022.

The lawsuit calls on the court to require Corado and the former board members to pay “restitution, compensatory damages, punitive damages, receivership fees and expenses, court costs, attorneys’ fees, and expenses, and any other relief the court deems necessary and proper.”

A D.C. Superior Court judge on May 1, 2023, dismissed the lawsuit filed by the Alston Foundation against all but one of the former Casa Ruby board members but did not dismiss the case against Corado.

The Alston Foundation has appealed the ruling dismissing the lawsuit, and the case is now pending before the D.C. Court of Appeals.

The lawsuit also alleges that the board failed to adequately oversee the actions of Corado, who pleaded guilty in July of this year to a charge of wire fraud as part of a plea bargain deal offered by prosecutors.

The charge to which Corado pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court for D.C. says she allegedly diverted at least $150,000 “in taxpayer-backed emergency COVID relief funds” awarded to Casa Ruby to “private offshore bank accounts for her personal use,” according to a statement released by the U.S. Attorney’s office.

Corado, who initially denied the allegations against her, is currently staying with a family member in Rockville, Md., in a home detention arrangement following her arrest by the FBI on March 5 of this year. She is scheduled to be sentenced on Jan. 10.

D.C. Superior Court Judge Danya A. Dayson stated that her decision to dismiss the lawsuit against seven of the eight former board members was based on her interpretation of D.C. law. She said she believes the law holds that members of an organization’s board of directors can only be held liable for harming an organization like Casa Ruby if they “intentionally, rather than negligently, inflicted harm on Casa Ruby.”

The judge said she did not dismiss the case against one of the board members because the lawsuit presents evidence that the board member received some financial benefits from Corado.

In a legal brief filed with the appeals court, the Alston Foundation attorneys state that evidence shows the Casa Ruby board members “were deliberately indifferent or ‘willfully blind’ to the alleged wrongful conduct of the nonprofit’s executive director amounting to actual knowledge on their part that inaction would harm the nonprofit, ultimately and forcibly leading to its financial inability to continue operation.”

The former board members have declined requests for comment on the lawsuit.

Harrison, the attorney representing the Alston Foundation in the bankruptcy filing, said anyone who is owed money by Casa Ruby has until Jan. 21 to file a “proof of claim” form with the bankruptcy court to be eligible to be compensated if funds become available.

At the time of Casa Ruby’s shutdown, the organization’s employees were among those who said they were not paid in the months or weeks prior to the shutdown.

Asked what prompted the Alston Foundation to file the bankruptcy petition on behalf of Casa Ruby, Harris said, “Filing the bankruptcy petition ensures that a trustee with the appropriate expertise can wrap up the remaining issues while allowing the Wanda Alston Foundation to stay focused on its core mission.” 

U.S. Bankruptcy Court records show that one of the officials in charge of collecting proof of claim forms for those owed money is Mark E. Albert, a court appointed Trustee for the bankruptcy filing. Court records show he can be reached at 202-728-3020.

Continue Reading

Rehoboth Beach

Adult suspect pleads guilty to Rehoboth Beach hate crime

Case pending for five juveniles charged in targeting women for harassment

Published

on

(Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

A 21-year-old man has pleaded guilty to a charge of disorderly conduct in connection with an Aug. 17 incident in which five juveniles and one adult were arrested for allegedly targeting three women for harassment on a street in Rehoboth Beach based on their perception of the victims’ sexual orientation.

Lt. Mark Sweet, a spokesperson for the Rehoboth Beach Police Department, said the adult suspect in the case, Jerome Charleston, was sentenced to a fine of $100 plus court costs at a Sept. 18 arraignment in which he pleaded guilty to a single count of disorderly conduct.

A statement released by Rehoboth police at the time of the incident says it occurred on Saturday, Aug. 17, at 2 a.m. at Baltimore Avenue and Second Street. The statement says three women flagged down a police officer after a vehicle drove past them and then came to a stop.

According to the statement, five juveniles exited the vehicle and approached the women, making statements that their behavior in public was not appropriate. During the exchange, the statement continues, one of the juveniles fired an Airsoft gun at the women and all five returned to the vehicle and fled the area.

Airsoft guns are replica guns designed to shoot non-metallic projectiles. No injuries were reported in the incident.

The police statement says officers in nearby Dewey Beach located the vehicle and apprehended the five juveniles and an adult driving the vehicle.

“Once in custody, it was determined that the only reason the suspects stopped to confront the victims was due to their perception of the victims’ sexual orientation,” the Rehoboth police statement says.

The police statement says three of the juveniles arrested in the case, two of whom were 15 years old and the other 14, were from Rehoboth Beach. It says another youth, age 14, was from nearby Lewes, and the other, at age 15, was from nearby Blades, Del.

The statement says each of the juveniles was charged with Aggravated Menacing, a felony; and the misdemeanor counts of Offensive Touching, Conspiracy in the Third Degree, Disorderly Conduct, and a Hate Crime.

Charleston, the only adult in the case, was charged with Disorderly Conduct, which is a misdemeanor.

The Washington Blade couldn’t immediately determine the status of the case against the juveniles. Police spokesperson Sweet said those cases were still pending and Rehoboth Police could not comment further on those cases.

In most jurisdictions, including Delaware, juvenile cases are kept confidential and are not part of the public court records.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular