Connect with us

District of Columbia

Brett Parson arrested in Florida on sex with minor charges

Former D.C. police lieutenant served as head of LGBT Liaison Unit

Published

on

Brett Parson, gay news, Washington Blade
Former D.C. Police Lt. Brett Parson. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Former D.C. police lieutenant Brett Parson, who served as supervisor of the department’s LGBT Liaison Unit before retiring from the force in 2020, was arrested in Boca Raton, Fla., on Feb. 12, for allegedly having sex with a consenting 16-year-old boy in violation of Florida’s age of consent law, which is 18, according to an arrest affidavit filed in court.

The affidavit, which was prepared by a detective with the Coconut Creek (Fla.) Police Department, says the 16-year-old told police he and Parson met on the gay online dating app called Growlr and agreed to meet for a possible sexual encounter after exchanging “explicit” photos of each other.

An arrest warrant obtained by Coconut Creek police charges Parson with two counts of “Unlawful Sexual Activity with a Minor.” A separate incident and investigative report filed in court by Boca Raton police says officers with that department, in cooperation with Coconut Creek police, arrested Parson outside the Boca Raton residence of his parents where Parson was staying while visiting Florida from D.C.

The Washington Blade couldn’t immediately reach Parson for comment or determine the status of his case. Fox News reported it obtained court records showing Parson was being held at the Main Detention Center in Palm Beach County without bond as of Feb. 14, and it wasn’t clear if he had retained an attorney who could speak on his behalf.

The incident report filed by Boca Raton police says Parson was arrested on Feb. 12, several hours after Coconut Creek police say he and the 16-year-old allegedly had a sexual encounter in a car belonging to Parson’s father that Parson was driving and after he and the 16-year-old arranged to meet at a gas station in Coconut Creek near where the youth lives.

Criminal defense lawyers have expressed concern on behalf of clients in similar cases that an adult arrested for having consensual sex with a 16 or 17-year-old in a state where the age of consent is 18 would not have violated the law in states where the age of consent is 16. An online search of U.S. age of consent laws shows that at least 16 states and D.C. have established the age of consent for sexual acts at 16.

At the time of his retirement in 2020 after 26 years on the D.C. police force, Parson announced he was starting a consulting business to advise law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad on police-related issues. He also announced he would become a part-time volunteer D.C. police reserve officer as part of the department’s Reserve Officer Corps.

When asked to confirm media reports that Parson had been removed from his position as a reserve officer, D.C. police spokesperson Sean Hickman sent the Blade a short statement confirming those reports.

“We were made aware of the retired member’s arrest early Sunday morning,” the statement says. “MPD immediately terminated him from our Reserve Corps.”

According to the arrest affidavit filed by Coconut Creek Police Det. Sgt. John McKinney, officers on routine duty during the early morning hours of Feb. 12 observed a vehicle driven by the 16-year-old being followed by a vehicle driven by Parson. The affidavit says the officers approached both vehicles after they observed the vehicle driven by the 16-year-year-old, a Ford Focus, turned into a “restricted access facility owned by Comcast.”

It says the vehicle driven by Parson, a red Buick convertible, “waited in the middle of the roadway,” prompting officers to approach Parson. The affidavit says Parson told the officers he was a police officer visiting his parents from D.C. and wasn’t familiar with the area and simply got lost. It says the officers allowed Parson to leave the area after he told them he did not know the person in the other vehicle.

“The officers then made contact with the driver of the gray Ford Focus, later identified as the 16-year-old minor hereinafter referred to as ‘RT,’” the affidavit says. “RT advised the officers that he was using Growlr, a dating application for gay men, to communicate with a male who identified himself as Brett,” the affidavit continues. “He stated that Brett told him he was looking for no strings attached casual sex, repeatedly asked him to meet, and sent each other explicit photographs.”

After initially meeting at a Shell gas station, at about 1 a.m. on Feb. 12, he and Parson arranged to drive to another location and park their cars in a secluded parking lot at the site of a daycare center in Coconut Creek, where RT got into the car Parson was driving, according to the affidavit. He told police the two talked for a while before they began kissing and a short time later performed oral sex on each other, the affidavit says RT recounted to police.

It says that the two attracted the attention of police when RT became nervous after someone walked past the parked car where he and Parson were engaging in intimate acts and the two decided to drive in their separate cars to find another location. That’s when police noticed that RT drove his vehicle into a restricted area and officers approached him to find out what was going on.

The affidavit does not say what prompted RT to disclose the intimate details of his alleged sexual acts with Parson when the officers would not otherwise have learned about that. The affidavit also doesn’t explain how it came about that RT’s parents arrived on the scene where police were interviewing their son as stated in the affidavit, although it’s likely that RT provided police with his parents contact information.

“We first spoke with RT’s parents and explained what we knew up to this point and the process involved in a case of this nature,” the affidavit states. “After a detailed explanation of their options, RT’s parents stated they would like to press charges against Brett Parson and together with their son would consent to the necessary steps for evidence collection,” it says.

“We then spoke with RT,” the affidavit says in recounting the action by McKinney and other police investigators. “It should be noted that RT is a thin build male who clearly does not appear to be 18 years of age or older,” it says. The affidavit says RT then repeated his account of his interactions with Parson that he gave to the officers who stopped him in his car earlier that morning.

The affidavit says RT turned over his phone to police to allow them to read the text messages that he and Parson exchanged after they met on the Growlr dating site. It quotes RT texting Parson to say “so sexy” after Parson sent him a shirtless photo of himself. After RT sent Parson a clothed photo of himself, Parson replied, “You are so cute,” the affidavit says. It says the two subsequently exchanged “explicit” photos of each other.

The affidavit’s recounting of the text messages between Parson and RT makes it clear that RT willingly chose to meet Parson for a sexual encounter knowing that Parson was an older man. The affidavit says Parson is 53.

After interviewing RT and his parents, the affidavit says detectives escorted them to the Coconut Creek Police’s Sexual Assault Treatment Center “for a physical examination, evidence collection and sworn recorded statement.” It says RT was then shown a group of photos of others along with Parson’s photo and he “positively identified Brett” as the person with whom he engaged in sexual activity.

“Based on the facts above, probable cause exists for the issuance of an arrest warrant for Brett Parson because Parson, who is over 24 years of age, did engage in sexual activity, in this case oral sex with each other, involving the victim who is only 16 years of age,” the affidavit concludes.

By mentioning that Parson was older than 24 years or age the affidavit was referring to the Florida age of consent statute that allows a person between the age of 18 and 23 to legally engage in consensual sex with a person who is 16 or 17 years old.

The affidavit does not say — and it could not immediately be determined — whether RT self identifies as gay, whether he was out to his parents as a gay person before the incident with Parson surfaced, or whether his parents are supportive of his sexual orientation. LGBTQ youth advocates have reported that many LGBTQ young people are confronted with hostile parents who disparage their sexual orientation or gender identity and sometimes prompt the young LGBTQ people to run away from their homes.

Gay former D.C. Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner Alex Padro, who says he has known Parson for many years in Padro’s role as a community activist in the city’s Shaw neighborhood, said Parson “earned my respect and that of many in our city and beyond” during Parson’s career as a police officer.

“Brett Parson served our city proudly for 26 years before his retirement in 2020,” Padro said. “Just like anyone else accused of a crime, Mr. Parson deserves to be treated as being innocent until proven guilty, and is entitled to mount a defense,” he said.

“MPD’s action in terminating a 26-year veteran of its ranks from the Reserve Corps without due process, without even hearing his side of the story is both un-American and unjust, depriving our citizens and MPD of his years of experience and demonstrating to those volunteer reservists that MPD does not have their back,” Padro said.  

D.C. gay activist Rick Rosendall said Parson’s arrest raises the issue of teenage sexuality that the prevailing political and social climate does not appear ready to address.

“A 16-year-old cruising on Growlr may be a poor choice for a sexual partner, but he is not a victim,” Rosendall said. “Our society continues to have the most absurdly counterproductive attitudes regarding teenage sexuality, as if it could be wished away,” he said. “The result of this denialism is teen pregnancies and STDs.”

“Brett Parson has done our community considerable service and I hold him in high regard,” added Rosendall.

Legal observers have said age of consent laws are based on the long-held belief that a person under the age determined to be the legal “age of consent” is incapable of giving informed consent to sexual acts.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case

Sean Charles Dunn faced misdemeanor charge

Published

on

Sean Charles Dunn was found not guilty on Thursday. (Washington Blade file photo by Joe Reberkenny)

A jury with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday, Nov. 6, found D.C. resident Sean Charles Dunn not guilty of assault for tossing a hero sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10. 

Dunn’s attorneys hailed the verdict as a gesture of support for Dunn’s contention that his action, which was captured on video that went viral on social media, was an exercise of his First Amendment right to protest the federal border agent’s participating in President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal troops on D.C. streets. 

Friends of Dunn have said that shortly before the sandwich tossing incident took place Dunn had been at the nearby gay nightclub Bunker, which was hosting a Latin dance party called Tropicoqueta. Sabrina Shroff, one of three attorneys representing Dunn at the trial, said during the trial after Dunn left the nightclub he went to the submarine sandwich shop on 14th Street at the corner of U Street, where he saw the border patrol agent and other law enforcement officers  standing in front of the shop.

 Shroff and others who know Dunn have said he was fearful that the border agent outside the sub shop and immigrant agents might raid the Bunker Latin night event. Bunker’s entrance is on U Street just around the corner from the sub shop where the federal agents were standing.

 “I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything happening,“ Dunn told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict while joined by his attorneys. “And that night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants,” he said.

 “And let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says, E Pluribus Unum,” he continued. “That means from many, one. Every life matters no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free.”

The verdict followed a two-day trial with testimony by just two witnesses, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent Gregory Lairmore, who identified Dunn as the person who threw the sandwich at his chest, and Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who told the jury she witnessed Dunn toss the sandwich at Lairmore while shouting obscenities.

Shroff told the jury Dunn was exercising his First Amendment right to protest and that the tossing of the sandwich at Lairmore, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, did not constitute an assault under the federal assault law to which Dunn was charged, among other things, because the federal agent was not injured. 

Prosecutors  with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge. But the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.

“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” the criminal complaint states, “pointing his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”

The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1. 

Prosecutors repeatedly played the video of the incident for the jurors on video screens in the courtroom. 

Dunn, who chose not to testify at his trial, and his attorneys have not disputed the obvious evidence that Dunn threw the sandwich that hit Lairmore in the chest. Lead defense attorney Shroff and co-defense attorneys Julia Gatto and Nicholas Silverman argued that Dunn’s action did not constitute an assault under the legal definition of common law assault in the federal assault statute.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo, the lead prosecutor in the case, strongly disputed that claim, citing various  provisions in the law and appeals court rulings that he claimed upheld his and the government’s contention that an “assault” can take place even if a victim is not injured as well as if there was no physical contact between the victim and an alleged assailant, only a threat of physical contact and injury.

The dispute over the intricacies of  the assault law and whether Dunn’s action reached the level of an assault under the law dominated the two-day trial, with U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols, who presided over the trial, weighing in with his own interpretation of the assault statute. Among other things, he said it would be up to the jury to decide whether or not Dunn committed an assault.

Court observers have said in cases like this, a jury could have issued a so-called  “nullification” verdict in which they acquit a defendant even though they believe he or she committed the offense in question because they believe the charge is unjust. The other possibility, observers say, is the jury believed the defense was right in claiming a law was not violated.

DiLorenzo and his two co-prosecutors in the case declined to comment in response to requests by reporters following the verdict.

“We really want to thank the jury for having sent back an affirmation that his sentiment is not just tolerated but it is legal, it is welcome,” defense attorney Shroff said in referring to Dunn’s actions. “And we thank them very much for that verdict,” she said.

Dunn thanked his attorneys for providing what he called excellent representation “and for offering all of their services pro bono,” meaning free of charge.

Dunn, an Air Force veteran who later worked as an international affairs specialist at the U.S. Department of Justice, was fired from that job by DOJ officials after his arrest for the sandwich tossing incident. 

“I would like to thank family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it  was emotional, or spiritual, or artistic, or financial,” he told the gathering outside the courthouse. “To the people that opened their hearts and homes to me, I am eternally grateful.” 

“As always, we accept a jury’s verdict; that is the system within which we function,” CNN quoted U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro as saying after the verdict in the Dunn case. “However, law enforcement should never be subjected to assault, no matter how ‘minor,’” Pirro told CNN in a statement.

“Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another,” CNN quoted her as saying.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Trial begins for man charged with throwing sandwich at federal agent

Jury views video of incident that went viral on social media

Published

on

Posters depicting Sean Charles Dunn throwing a sandwich quickly appeared around the city last summer. (Blade photo by Joe Reberkenny)

Prosecutors showed jurors a video of Sean Charles Dunn throwing a sub sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the bustling intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10 of this year on the opening day of Dunn’s trial that has drawn national attention.

According to a knowledgeable source, Dunn threw the sandwich at the agent after shouting obscenities at him and other federal law enforcement officers who were stationed at that location after he was refused admission to the nearby gay bar Bunker for being too intoxicated.

Charging documents and reports by witnesses show that Dunn expressed outrage that the federal officers were stationed there and at other locations in D.C. under orders from President Donald Trump  to help curtail crime in the city.

Prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge, but the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.

“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” a criminal complaint states, “pointed his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!” 

The complaint adds, “Dunn continued his conduct for several minutes before crossing the street and continuing to yell obscenities at V-1. At approximately 11:06 p.m. Dunn approached V-1 and threw a sandwich at him, striking V-1 in the chest.”

The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1.”

At the opening day of testimony at the trial on Tuesday, Nov. 4, V-1, who was identified as Customs and Border Patrol Agent Gregory Lairmore, testified as the first government witness. Also testifying was Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who said she was present at the scene and saw Dunn throw the sandwich at Lairmore.

The position taken by Dunn’s defense attorneys is outlined in a 24-page memorandum in support of a motion filed on Oct. 15 calling for the dismissal of the case, which was denied by U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols.

“This prosecution is a blatant abuse of power,” the defense memo states. “The federal government has chosen to bring a criminal case over conduct so minor it would be comical – were it not for the unmistakable retaliatory motive behind it and the resulting risk to Mr. Dunn.”

It adds, “Mr. Dunn tossed a sandwich at a fully armed, heavily protected Customs and Border Protection {CBP} officer. That act alone would never have drawn a federal charge. What did was the political speech that accompanied it.” 

The trial was scheduled to resume at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, Nov. 5.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. mayor announces use of local funds for SNAP food aid

Md., Va. arrange for similar local replacement of federal money

Published

on

Mayor Muriel Bowser has arranged for at least $129 million in local D.C. funds to be used for SNAP. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser announced on Oct. 30 that she has arranged for at least $129 million in local D.C funds to be used to support as many as 141,000 D.C. residents in need who depend on the federal food assistance programs known as SNAP and WIC whose funding will be cut off beginning Nov. 1 due to the federal shutdown.

SNAP, which stands for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and WIC, the Women, Infants, and Children Program, provide food related services for 10 million or more people in need nationwide.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, and Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer also announced similar plans to provide emergency state funds to replace the federal funds cut off beginning Nov. 1 for the two food programs. 

Similar to Bowser, Moore and Youngkin said their replacement funds at this time would only last for the month of November. Each said they were hopeful that Congress would end the shutdown before the end of November.

“We know that SNAP and WIC play a critical role in keeping thousands of Washingtonians and millions of Americans put food on the table each month,” Bowser said in a statement. “We were hopeful it wouldn’t come to this – and we will need the federal government to reopen as soon as possible – but for right now, we’re moving forward to ensure we take care of D.C. residents in November,” she said.

The mayor’s statement says about 85,000 D.C. households, consisting of 141,000 individuals, receive SNAP support each month, with an average monthly allocation of $314. It says more than 12,500 city residents in 8,300 households benefit from the WIC program.  

A spokesperson for the D.C. Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs couldn’t immediately be reached to determine whether the city has an estimated count of how many LGBTQ residents receive support from the SNAP and SIC programs. 

Continue Reading

Popular