Connect with us

homepage news

D.C. Auditor’s report questions funding decision for Mary’s House

Says lesbian housing director prioritized ‘lower ranking’ projects



Mary's House, gay news, Washington Blade
Polly Donaldson, director of the D.C. Department of Housing and Community Development, is one of Mayor Muriel Bowser’s LGBT cabinet members.

In a little-noticed development, a report released earlier this year by the Office of the D.C. Auditor named Mary’s House for Older Adults, a planned home for LGBT seniors, as one of five affordable housing projects that received millions of dollars in city housing funds that were “ranked in the bottom half” of 20 applicants.

The May 30 report says the lower ranking projects, including Mary’s House, were selected against the recommendations of expert staff evaluators by Polly Donaldson, the director of the D.C. Department of Housing and Community Development who as an out lesbian is one of Mayor Muriel Bowser’s LGBT cabinet members.

“I write to share concerns and recommendations pertaining to the procurement process that resulted in the award of $78 million for Housing Production Trust Fund (HPTF) projects in June 2018,” said D.C. Auditor Kathy Patterson, the author of the report, in a letter to the D.C. Council at the time the report was released.

“In brief, five of the nine proposals selected by leadership had been ranked in the bottom half of applications by staff evaluators and the final selection meant 353 fewer affordable housing units,” Patterson said.

She noted that the city-funded Housing Production Trust Fund was created with the full support of the mayor and Council to help relieve the city’s affordable housing crisis that experts say has forced thousands of residents to leave the city and has swelled the ranks of homeless residents.

The Trust Fund provides funds to both private development companies and nonprofit organizations like Mary’s House that enter into a partnership with a developer to build new and to preserve existing housing projects that are affordable to low and moderate income people.

Patterson has acknowledged that her office’s investigation into the D.C. housing department’s selection process for the affordable housing projects was triggered in part by an ethics complaint filed with the city’s Board of Ethics and Government Accountability in June 2018 by a whistleblower believed to have been an employee with the housing department.

Patterson declined to release the whistleblower’s report to the Blade, but the whistleblower him or herself appears to have given a copy of the report to the Washington City Paper, which describes it as “explosive” in its criticism of the way the lower ranking housing projects were selected by Donaldson for funding. Among other things the City Paper’s Loose Lips columnist reported earlier this month that the city’s former Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development Brian Kenner and the former D.C. Director of Real Estate Sarosh Olpadwala “leaned on” Donaldson and her deputy, Allison Ladd, to steer city funding to at least one developer “politically connected” to the mayor. 

The Washington Post reported at the time the Auditor’s report was released that all five of the projects that received the lower rankings, including Mary’s House, were either developers themselves or in partnership with a developer that either directly or their executives have given campaign contributions to Mayor Bowser.

In statements submitted to Patterson that are included in the Auditor’s report, Donaldson disputes any claims that her decisions to select the housing projects were politically motivated, saying they were based solely on her overall assessment that the projects would benefit the city and those in need of affordable housing.

Bowser, meanwhile, announced in a June 2018 statement that the Department of Housing and Community Development had awarded Mary’s House $1.19 million from the Housing Production Trust Fund as part of a $103 million city funding allocation aimed at preserving or producing affordable housing for more than 1,700 residents, including seniors and people experiencing homelessness.

Imani Woody, founder and CEO of Mary’s House, has said plans for the facility call for replacing a single family house currently on the site of the facility at 401 Anacostia Road, S.E. with a new structure that will accommodate 15 LGBT seniors in 15 individual suites.

When contacted by the Washington Blade this week Woody declined to comment on the findings of the D.C. Auditor’s report

“Mary’s House for Older Adults applied for and was approved for D.C. funding,” she said. “We are not a part of the approval process and have nothing to say or add to this discussion.”

In a separate statement at the time the funding was announced, Donaldson said Mary’s House and the other projects approved for funding each met a series of criteria indicating they were viable projects that would boost the city’s and the mayor’s goal of increasing and preserving affordable housing.

“This is really a way to say we can help,” Donaldson said in her statement. “This is a nonprofit development,” she said. “Mary’s House is a nonprofit organization and we think it’s important to support some big projects and smaller projects like this one.”

In her Auditor’s report released on May 30, Patterson did not disclose why the staff evaluators at the Department of Housing and Community Development gave Mary’s House and the other four applicants for housing funds a low ranking. The report says the department’s Development Finance Division is responsible for conducting a staff review of the proposed projects and for presenting recommendations to the director, who has the authority to make the final decision on all projects.

“The May 30 report lists the Mary’s House project as one that got funded but hadn’t been ranked as high as a few that did not get funded in the announcements in spring 2018,” Patterson told the Blade in an email. “And the Development Finance Division did not recommend NOT funding Mary’s House – it was just given a lower rating in their scoring,” Patterson said in her email.

She also noted that the projects that were higher ranked that didn’t get funding in 2018 were funded a year later in 2019.

When contacted by the Blade for comment about the Auditor’s report and the issue of the lower ranking for the Mary’s House project, Donaldson sent a short email statement reiterating the more detailed response she sent to Patterson at the time the Auditor’s report was being prepared earlier this year.

“Mayor Bowser has made support for the production and preservation of affordable housing her top priority,” Donald said in her statement to the Blade. “She has made more investments and delivered more results than any Mayor previously,” she said.

“My agency followed all laws in making decisions in the best interest of the District,” she continued. “Further, the Council Auditor herself lauds the Development Finance Division controls that I put in place. D.C. must be inclusive and we must take into account developments across the city in making decisions with each RFP round.”

She was referring to a section of the Auditor’s report where Patterson points out that Donaldson, who assumed the job of housing director in 2015, put in place the detailed internal controls and processes for approving funding for housing projects. The whistleblower, however, accuses her of violating those procedures by rejecting the recommendations of her staff evaluators

Donaldson defies subpoena, invokes ‘deliberative process privilege’

Among the items Patterson included in an appendix to her Auditor’s report is a dramatic exchange of email messages between she and Donaldson over Patterson’s attempt to obtain internal housing department documents prepared by the evaluators giving their reasons for recommending projects for funding.

After Donaldson declined to turn over those documents on grounds that doing so would be harmful to future internal staff discussions on funding matters, Patterson issued Donaldson a subpoena that her office is authorized to obtain ordering her to turn over the documents.

Citing the D.C. law empowering the D.C. Auditor to obtain a subpoena, Patterson’s subpoena states, “YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to produce and/or otherwise provide…any and all records” pertaining to the housing department’s Development Finance Division evaluation of the 2017 proposed housing projects, including the Mary’s House project.

Among the documents sought by the subpoena were “evaluators rating sheets, written comments, recommendations, and any other documentation indicating the opinion, evaluations, comments and recommendations of the evaluators” relating to the five projects in question.

In a four-page letter responding to the subpoena, Donaldson invoked what she called “deliberative process privilege,” which she said protects agency documents that are “both pre-decisional and deliberative” from being released to someone outside of the agency in which they were made.

“The Department objects to the production of evaluator rating sheets, written comments, recommendations, and any other documentation indicating the opinions, evaluations, comments, and recommendations of the evaluators related to any Development Finance Division project as they fall squarely under the deliberative process privilege,” Donaldson said in her April 29 letter to Patterson.

“Disclosure of these types of information would render the Request for Proposal and decision making processes ineffective and unable to achieve results in the best interests of the District,” she said in her letter.

In a May 3 letter responding to Donaldson’s letter, Patterson called Donaldson’s assertions “meritless.” She said regardless of whether the housing department has the authority to invoke deliberative process privilege, Congress through the D.C. Home Rule Act has provided her office with full authority to issue subpoenas and to petition the D.C. Superior Court to enforce those subpoenas.

“Despite your noncompliance with the Subpoena and prior information request, however, I have now obtained all the information on the DHCD Housing Production Trust Fund that I need for present purposes,” Patterson said in her letter. “While I am not withdrawing the Subpoena, I do not perceive a current need to involve the courts,” she said.

Had Patterson taken steps to enforce the subpoena, a D.C. Superior Court judge could have found Donaldson in contempt of court if she continued to refuse to obey the subpoena and possibly ordered her held in jail.

Donaldson didn’t respond to a question from the Blade asking if she felt so strongly about her belief that the documents in question should not be released that she would risk going to jail by defying the subpoena.

Patterson told the Blade that although the whistleblower had provided her office with many of the internal housing department documents she needed, she confirmed the authenticity of the documents by obtaining them by invoking another source of authority her office has. She arranged for the city’s IT office that oversees the D.C. employee email system to turn over internal email between housing department employees and managers, which contained copies of the internal documents Patterson needed. 

“If we had not had that option and we were not able to enlist the Executive Office of the Mayor in securing the documents (we go up the chain of command on such things) we would have gone to court to enforce the subpoena,” Patterson said.

Although Donaldson refused to turn over the internal evaluation documents, she submitted a detailed written explanation to Patterson of her reasons for selecting the five projects for funding that received a lower ranking. Among other things, she said shortly after the evaluation process was completed she learned that the D.C. Council had approved additional funding for the city’s Local Rent Supplement Program (LRSP) housing vouchers, which provide rent supplements to people in need of affordable housing.

“This new information allowed the prioritization and categorization of the projects based upon the amount of requested LRSP vouchers and was a primary driver of my decision to modify the recommendations made by the staff,” Donaldson said in one of her responses to the Auditor’s report.
“At all times I exercise my discretion in an impartial manner, without favoritism based on any impermissible grounds,” she said.

At the time the Auditor’s report was released, John Falcicchio, the mayor’s chief of staff, told the Washington Post Donaldson “has the authority and the responsibility to make decisions about how best to create and preserve affordable housing. We have full confidence in her ability to do so.”

Bowser nominated Donaldson to become director of the housing department in December 2014 in her role as mayor-elect. The D.C. Council approved her nomination a short time later. Housing activists have credited Donaldson, 62, as one of the city’s foremost experts on affordable housing issues and programs to address homelessness. Prior to assuming the job as housing department director Donaldson served since 2004 as executive director of Transitional Housing Corporation, a widely acclaimed nonprofit organization that provides services to homeless people and develops programs to transition them into permanent homes.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

homepage news

Equality Act, contorted as a danger by anti-LGBTQ forces, is all but dead

No political willpower to force vote or reach a compromise



Despite having President Biden in the White House and Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress, efforts to update federal civil rights laws to strengthen the prohibition on discrimination against LGBTQ people by passing the Equality Act are all but dead as opponents of the measure have contorted it beyond recognition.

Political willpower is lacking to find a compromise that would be acceptable to enough Republican senators to end a filibuster on the bill — a tall order in any event — nor is there the willpower to force a vote on the Equality Act as opponents stoke fears about transgender kids in sports and not even unanimity in the Democratic caucus in favor of the bill is present, stakeholders who spoke to the Blade on condition of anonymity said.

In fact, there are no imminent plans to hold a vote on the legislation even though Pride month is days away, which would be an opportune time for Congress to demonstrate solidarity with the LGBTQ community by holding a vote on the legislation.

If the Equality Act were to come up for a Senate vote in the next month, it would not have the support to pass. Continued assurances that bipartisan talks are continuing on the legislation have yielded no evidence of additional support, let alone the 10 Republicans needed to end a filibuster.

“I haven’t really heard an update either way, which is usually not good,” one Democratic insider said. “My understanding is that our side was entrenched in a no-compromise mindset and with [Sen. Joe] Manchin saying he didn’t like the bill, it doomed it this Congress. And the bullying of hundreds of trans athletes derailed our message and our arguments of why it was broadly needed.”

The only thing keeping the final nail from being hammered into the Equality Act’s coffin is the unwillingness of its supporters to admit defeat. Other stakeholders who spoke to the Blade continued to assert bipartisan talks are ongoing, strongly pushing back on any conclusion the legislation is dead.

Alphonso David, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said the Equality Act is “alive and well,” citing widespread public support he said includes “the majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents and a growing number of communities across the country engaging and mobilizing every day in support of the legislation.”

“They understand the urgent need to pass this bill and stand up for LGBTQ people across our country,” David added. “As we engage with elected officials, we have confidence that Congress will listen to the voices of their constituents and continue fighting for the Equality Act through the lengthy legislative process.  We will also continue our unprecedented campaign to grow the already-high public support for a popular bill that will save lives and make our country fairer and more equal for all. We will not stop until the Equality Act is passed.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), chief sponsor of the Equality Act in the Senate, also signaled through a spokesperson work continues on the legislation, refusing to give up on expectations the legislation would soon become law.

“Sen. Merkley and his staff are in active discussions with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to try to get this done,” McLennan said. “We definitely see it as a key priority that we expect to become law.”

A spokesperson Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who had promised to force a vote on the Equality Act in the Senate on the day the U.S. House approved it earlier this year, pointed to a March 25 “Dear Colleague” letter in which he identified the Equality Act as one of several bills he’d bring up for a vote.

Despite any assurances, the hold up on the bill is apparent. Although the U.S. House approved the legislation earlier this year, the Senate Judiciary Committee hasn’t even reported out the bill yet to the floor in the aftermath of the first-ever Senate hearing on the bill in March. A Senate Judiciary Committee Democratic aide, however, disputed that inaction as evidence the Equality Act is dead in its tracks: “Bipartisan efforts on a path forward are ongoing.”

Democrats are quick to blame Republicans for inaction on the Equality Act, but with Manchin withholding his support for the legislation they can’t even count on the entirety of their caucus to vote “yes” if it came to the floor. Progressives continue to advocate an end to the filibuster to advance legislation Biden has promised as part of his agenda, but even if they were to overcome headwinds and dismantle the institution needing 60 votes to advance legislation, the Equality Act would likely not have majority support to win approval in the Senate with a 50-50 party split.

The office of Manchin, who has previously said he couldn’t support the Equality Act over concerns about public schools having to implement the transgender protections applying to sports and bathrooms, hasn’t responded to multiple requests this year from the Blade on the legislation and didn’t respond to a request to comment for this article.

Meanwhile, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who declined to co-sponsor the Equality Act this year after having signed onto the legislation in the previous Congress, insisted through a spokesperson talks are still happening across the aisle despite the appearances the legislation is dead.

“There continues to be bipartisan support for passing a law that protects the civil rights of Americans, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity,” said Annie Clark, a Collins spokesperson. “The Equality Act was a starting point for negotiations, and in its current form, it cannot pass. That’s why there are ongoing discussions among senators and stakeholders about a path forward.”

Let’s face it: Anti-LGBTQ forces have railroaded the debate by making the Equality Act about an end to women’s sports by allowing transgender athletes and danger to women in sex-segregated places like bathrooms and prisons. That doesn’t even get into resolving the issue on drawing the line between civil rights for LGBTQ people and religious freedom, which continues to be litigated in the courts as the U.S. Supreme Court is expected any day now to issue a ruling in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia to determine if foster care agencies can reject same-sex couples over religious objections.

For transgender Americans, who continue to report discrimination and violence at high rates, the absence of the Equality Act may be most keenly felt.

Mara Keisling, outgoing executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, disputed any notion the Equality Act is dead and insisted the legislation is “very much alive.”

“We remain optimistic despite misinformation from the opposition,” Keisling said. “NCTE and our movement partners are still working fruitfully on the Equality Act with senators. In fact, we are gaining momentum with all the field organizing we’re doing, like phone banking constituents to call their senators. Legislating takes time. Nothing ever gets through Congress quickly. We expect to see a vote during this Congress, and we are hopeful we can win.”

But one Democratic source said calls to members of Congress against the Equality Act, apparently coordinated by groups like the Heritage Foundation, have has outnumbered calls in favor of it by a substantial margin, with a particular emphasis on Manchin.

No stories are present in the media about same-sex couples being kicked out of a restaurant for holding hands or transgender people for using the restroom consistent with their gender identity, which would be perfectly legal in 25 states thanks to the patchwork of civil rights laws throughout the United States and inadequate protections under federal law.

Tyler Deaton, senior adviser for the American Unity Fund, which has bolstered the Republican-led Fairness for All Act as an alternative to the Equality Act, said he continues to believe the votes are present for a compromise form of the bill.

“I know for a fact there is a supermajority level of support in the Senate for a version of the Equality Act that is fully protective of both LGBTQ civil rights and religious freedom,” Deaton said. “There is interest on both sides of the aisle in getting something done this Congress.”

Deaton, however, didn’t respond to a follow-up inquiry on what evidence exists of agreeing on this compromise.

Biden has already missed the goal he campaigned on in the 2020 election to sign the Equality Act into law within his first 100 days in office. Although Biden renewed his call to pass the legislation in his speech to Congress last month, as things stand now that appears to be a goal he won’t realize for the remainder of this Congress.

Nor has the Biden administration made the Equality Act an issue for top officials within the administration as it pushes for an infrastructure package as a top priority. One Democratic insider said Louisa Terrell, legislative affairs director for the White House, delegated work on the Equality Act to a deputy as opposed to handling it herself.

To be sure, Biden has demonstrated support for the LGBTQ community through executive action at an unprecedented rate, signing an executive order on day one ordering federal agencies to implement the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year in Bostock v. Clayton County to the fullest extent possible and dismantling former President Trump’s transgender military ban. Biden also made historic LGBTQ appointments with the confirmation of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Rachel Levine as assistant secretary of health.

A White House spokesperson insisted Biden’s team across the board remains committed to the Equality Act, pointing to his remarks to Congress.

“President Biden has urged Congress to get the Equality Act to his desk so he can sign it into law and provide long overdue civil rights protections to LGBTQ+ Americans, and he remains committed to seeing this legislation passed as quickly as possible,” the spokesperson said. “The White House and its entire legislative team remains in ongoing and close coordination with organizations, leaders, members of Congress, including the Equality Caucus, and staff to ensure we are working across the aisle to push the Equality Act forward.”

But at least in the near-term, that progress will fall short of fulfilling the promise of updating federal civil rights law with the Equality Act, which will mean LGBTQ people won’t be able to rely on those protections when faced with discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Continue Reading

homepage news

D.C. bill to ban LGBTQ panic defense delayed by Capitol security

Delivery of bill to Congress was held up due to protocols related to Jan. 6 riots



New fencing around the Capitol following the Jan. 6 insurrection prevented some D.C. bills from being delivered to the Hill for a required congressional review. (Blade file photo by Michael K. Lavers)

A bill approved unanimously last December by the D.C. Council to ban the so-called LGBTQ panic defense has been delayed from taking effect as a city law because the fence installed around the U.S. Capitol following the Jan. 6 insurrection prevented the law from being delivered to Congress.

According to Eric Salmi, communications director for D.C. Council member Charles Allen (D-Ward 6), who guided the bill through the Council’s legislative process, all bills approved by the Council and signed by the D.C. mayor must be hand-delivered to Congress for a required congressional review.

“What happened was when the Capitol fence went up after the January insurrection, it created an issue where we physically could not deliver laws to Congress per the congressional review period,” Salmi told the Washington Blade.

Among the bills that could not immediately be delivered to Congress was the Bella Evangelista and Tony Hunter Panic Defense Prohibition and Hate Crimes Response Amendment Act of 2020, which was approved by the Council on a second and final vote on Dec. 15.

Between the time the bill was signed by Mayor Muriel Bowser and published in the D.C. Register under procedural requirements for all bills, it was not ready to be transmitted to Congress until Feb. 16, the Council’s legislative record for the bill shows.

Salmi said the impasse in delivering the bill to Congress due to the security fence prevented the bill from reaching Congress on that date and prevented the mandatory 60-day congressional review period for this bill from beginning at that time. He noted that most bills require a 30 legislative day review by Congress.

But the Evangelista-Hunter bill, named after a transgender woman and a gay man who died in violent attacks by perpetrators who attempted to use the trans and gay panic defense, includes a law enforcement related provision that under the city’s Home Rule Charter passed by Congress in the early 1970s requires a 60-day congressional review.

“There is a chance it goes into effect any day now, just given the timeline is close to being up,” Salmi said on Tuesday. “I don’t know the exact date it was delivered, but I do know the countdown is on,” said Salmi, who added, “I would expect any day now it should go into effect and there’s nothing stopping it other than an insurrection in January.”

If the delivery to Congress had not been delayed, the D.C. Council’s legislative office estimated the congressional review would have been completed by May 12.

A congressional source who spoke on condition of being identified only as a senior Democratic aide, said the holdup of D.C. bills because of the Capitol fence has been corrected.

“The House found an immediate workaround, when this issue first arose after the Jan. 6 insurrection,” the aide said.

“This is yet another reason why D.C. Council bills should not be subject to a congressional review period and why we need to grant D.C. statehood,” the aide said.

The aide added that while no disapproval resolution had been introduced in Congress to overturn the D.C. Evangelista-Hunter bill, House Democrats would have defeated such a resolution.

“House Democrats support D.C. home rule, statehood, and LGBTQ rights,” said the aide.

LGBTQ rights advocates have argued that a ban on using a gay or transgender panic defense in criminal trials is needed to prevent defense attorneys from inappropriately asking juries to find that a victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression is to blame for a defendant’s criminal act, including murder.

Some attorneys have argued that their clients “panicked” after discovering the person against whom they committed a violent crime was gay or transgender, prompting them to act in a way they believed to be a form of self-defense.

In addition to its provision banning the LGBTQ panic defense, the Evangelista-Hunter bill includes a separate provision that strengthens the city’s existing hate crimes law by clarifying that hatred need not be the sole motivating factor for an underlying crime such as assault, murder, or threats to be prosecuted as a hate crime.

LGBTQ supportive prosecutors have said the clarification was needed because it is often difficult to prove to a jury that hatred is the only motive behind a violent crime. The prosecutors noted that juries have found defendants not guilty of committing a hate crime on grounds that they believed other motives were involved in a particular crime after defense lawyers argued that the law required “hate” to be the only motive in order to find someone guilty of a hate crime.

Salmi noted that while the hate crime clarification and panic defense prohibition provisions of the Evangelista-Hunter bill will become law as soon as the congressional review is completed, yet another provision in the bill will not become law after the congressional review because there are insufficient funds in the D.C. budget to cover the costs of implementing the provision.

The provision gives the D.C. Office of Human Rights and the Office of the D.C. Attorney General authority to investigate hate related discrimination at places of public accommodation. Salmi said the provision expands protections against discrimination to include web-based retailers or online delivery services that are not physically located in D.C.

“That is subject to appropriations,” Salmi said. “And until it is funded in the upcoming budget it cannot be legally enforced.”

He said that at Council member Allen’s request, the Council added language to the bill that ensures that all other provisions of the legislation that do not require additional funding – including the ban on use of the LGBTQ panic defense and the provision clarifying that hatred doesn’t have to be the sole motive for a hate crime – will take effect as soon as the congressional approval process is completed.

Continue Reading

homepage news

D.C. man charged with 2020 anti-gay death threat rearrested

Defendant implicated in three anti-LGBTQ incidents since 2011



shooting, DC Eagle, assault, hate crime, anti-gay attack, police discrimination, sex police, Sisson, gay news, Washington Blade

A D.C. man arrested in August 2020 for allegedly threatening to kill a gay man outside the victim’s apartment in the city’s Adams Morgan neighborhood and who was released while awaiting trial was arrested again two weeks ago for allegedly threatening to kill another man in an unrelated incident.

D.C. Superior Court records show that Jalal Malki, who was 37 at the time of his 2020 arrest on a charge of bias-related attempts to do bodily harm against the gay man, was charged on May 4, 2021 with unlawful entry, simple assault, threats to kidnap and injure a person, and attempted possession of a prohibited weapon against the owner of a vacant house at 4412 Georgia Ave., N.W.

Court charging documents state that Malki was allegedly staying at the house without permission as a squatter. An arrest affidavit filed in court by D.C. police says Malki allegedly threatened to kill the man who owns the house shortly after the man arrived at the house while Malki was inside.

According to the affidavit, Malki walked up to the owner of the house while the owner was sitting in his car after having called police and told him, “If you come back here, I’m going to kill you.” While making that threat Malki displayed what appeared to be a gun in his waistband, but which was later found to be a toy gun, the affidavit says.

Malki then walked back inside the house minutes before police arrived and arrested him. Court records show that similar to the court proceedings following his 2020 arrest for threatening the gay man, a judge in the latest case ordered Malki released while awaiting trial. In both cases, the judge ordered him to stay away from the two men he allegedly threatened to kill.

An arrest affidavit filed by D.C. police in the 2020 case states that Malki allegedly made the threats inside an apartment building where the victim lived on the 2300 block of Champlain Street, N.W. It says Malki was living in a nearby building but often visited the building where the victim lived.

“Victim 1 continued to state during an interview that it was not the first time that Defendant 1 had made threats to him, but this time Defendant 1 stated that if he caught him outside, he would ‘fucking kill him.’” the affidavit says. It quotes the victim as saying during this time Malki repeatedly called the victim a “fucking faggot.”

The affidavit, prepared by the arresting officers, says that after the officers arrested Malki and were leading him to a police transport vehicle to be booked for the arrest, he expressed an “excited utterance” that he was “in disbelief that officers sided with the ‘fucking faggot.’”

Court records show that Malki is scheduled to appear in court on June 4 for a status hearing for both the 2020 arrest and the arrest two weeks ago for allegedly threatening to kill the owner of the house in which police say he was illegally squatting.

Superior Court records show that Malki had been arrested three times between 2011 and 2015 in cases unrelated to the 2021 and 2020 cases for allegedly also making threats of violence against people. Two of the cases appear to be LGBTQ related, but prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office did not list the cases as hate crimes.

In the first of the three cases, filed in July 2011, Malki allegedly shoved a man inside Dupont Circle and threatened to kill him after asking the man why he was wearing a purple shirt.

“Victim 1 believes the assault occurred because Suspect 1 believes Victim 1 is a homosexual,” the police arrest affidavit says.

Court records show prosecutors charged Malki with simple assault and threats to do bodily harm in the case. But the court records show that on Sept. 13, 2011, D.C. Superior Court Judge Stephen F. Eilperin found Malki not guilty on both charges following a non-jury trial.

The online court records do not state why the judge rendered a not guilty verdict. With the courthouse currently closed to the public and the press due to COVID-related restrictions, the Washington Blade couldn’t immediately obtain the records to determine the judge’s reason for the verdict.

In the second case, court records show Malki was arrested by D.C. police outside the Townhouse Tavern bar and restaurant at 1637 R St., N.W. on Nov. 7, 2012 for allegedly threatening one or more people with a knife after employees ordered Malki to leave the establishment for “disorderly behavior.”

At the time, the Townhouse Tavern was located next door to the gay nightclub Cobalt, which before going out of business two years ago, was located at the corner of 17th and R Streets, N.W.

The police arrest affidavit in the case says Malki allegedly pointed a knife in a threatening way at two of the tavern’s employees who blocked his path when he attempted to re-enter the tavern. The affidavit says he was initially charged by D.C. police with assault with a dangerous weapon – knife. Court records, however, show that prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office lowered the charges to two counts of simple assault. The records show that on Jan. 15, 2013, Malki pleaded guilty to the two charges as part of a plea bargain arrangement.

The records show that Judge Marissa Demeo on that same day issued a sentence of 30 days for each of the two charges but suspended all 30 days for both counts. She then sentenced Malki to one year of supervised probation for both charges and ordered that he undergo alcohol and drug testing and undergo treatment if appropriate.

In the third case prior to the 2020 and 2021 cases, court records show Malki was arrested outside the Cobalt gay nightclub on March 14, 2015 on multiple counts of simple assault, attempted assault with a dangerous weapon – knife, possession of a prohibited weapon – knife, and unlawful entry.

The arrest affidavit says an altercation started on the sidewalk outside the bar when for unknown reasons, Malki grabbed a female customer who was outside smoking and attempted to pull her toward him. When her female friend came to her aid, Malki allegedly got “aggressive” by threatening the woman and “removed what appeared to be a knife from an unknown location” and pointed it at the woman’s friend in a threatening way, the affidavit says.

It says a Cobalt employee minutes later ordered Malki to leave the area and he appeared to do so. But others noticed that he walked toward another entrance door to Cobalt and attempted to enter the establishment knowing he had been ordered not to return because of previous problems with his behavior, the affidavit says. When he attempted to push away another employee to force his way into Cobalt, Malki fell to the ground during a scuffle and other employees held him on the ground while someone else called D.C. police.

Court records show that similar to all of Malki’s arrests, a judge released him while awaiting trial and ordered him to stay away from Cobalt and all of those he was charged with threatening and assaulting.

The records show that on Sept. 18, 2015, Malki agreed to a plea bargain offer by prosecutors in which all except two of the charges – attempted possession of a prohibited weapon and simple assault – were dropped. Judge Alfred S. Irving Jr. on Oct. 2, 2015 sentenced Malki to 60 days of incarnation for each of the two charges but suspended all but five days, which he allowed Malki to serve on weekends, the court records show.

The judge ordered that the two five-day jail terms could be served concurrently, meaning just five days total would be served, according to court records. The records also show that Judge Irving sentenced Malki to one year of supervised probation for each of the two counts and ordered that he enter an alcohol treatment program and stay away from Cobalt.

Continue Reading

Follow Us @washblade

Sign Up for Blade eBlasts