Connect with us

District of Columbia

Judge dismisses gay D.C. cop’s bias lawsuit

Former officer claimed anti-gay harassment and retaliation

Published

on

Former D.C. Police Chief Peter Newsham told the Blade at the time the lawsuit was filed that the MPD does not tolerate discrimination. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

In a little-noticed development, a federal judge on Feb. 21 of this year dismissed a lawsuit filed in 2015 by gay former D.C. police officer Christopher Lilly accusing fellow officers and supervisors of subjecting him to discrimination, harassment, and retaliation based on his sexual orientation.

In a 65-page ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan explained why he approved a motion filed by the District of Columbia requesting a summary judgement decision dismissing the case based on the assertion that the lawsuit lacked sufficient evidence to substantiate that discrimination of any kind took place.

The motion was filed by attorneys with the Office of the D.C. Attorney General, who represented the District and the Metropolitan Police Department of Washington, D.C., who were named as defendants in the lawsuit filed by Lilly.

Neither Lilly nor his attorney, Sameera Ali of the D.C. law firm Ali, White & Coleman, responded to a request by the Washington Blade seeking comment on the judge’s ruling.

Lilly charged in his lawsuit filed in May 2015 that between 2011 and 2013 he was subjected, among other things, to repeated anti-gay name-calling and other forms of harassment, including the placement of more than a dozen AIDS awareness stickers on his locker at the Fourth Police District, where he was stationed.

At the time he saw the AIDS stickers on his locker he also saw that someone wrote the word “fag” on the locker and poured a white liquid on the floor next to the locker simulating semen, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit says the discriminatory actions began shortly after December 2010 when “without plaintiff Lilly’s knowledge or consent, his sexual orientation, homosexual, was publicized maliciously and intentionally” at the Fourth District.

“Following plaintiff Lilly’s ‘outing,’ any other officer to come into contact with plaintiff Lilly subjected him to scrutiny, retaliation and ridicule by means of vulgar language, slandering his name and abilities to function as a police officer and questioning his abilities to serve due to his sexual orientation,” the lawsuit alleged.

The lawsuit, among other things, charged D.C., through the actions of police officials, with violating the D.C. Human Rights Act, which bans discrimination based on sexual orientation, and violating Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964, by discriminating against Lilly because of his gender and sexual orientation, creating a hostile work environment, and retaliating against him when he raised objections to the alleged discrimination.

In his ruling dismissing the case, Judge Sullivan points to arguments in the District’s answer to the lawsuit filed in 2020 and in the District’s motion calling for summary judgement, that Lilly failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his allegations.

The judge also cited what he described as multiple undisputed facts presented by the AG Office attorneys showing that Lilly had faced disciplinary actions for breaching police rules, including not showing up for work or showing up late for his shift of duty.

Other allegations by the MPD against Lilly, which Judge Sullivan says were unrelated to his sexual orientation, involved the temporary revocation of his police powers in 2012 due to alleged emotional stress he faced from a work-related exposure to bedbugs, according to the judge’s account of court filings.

“A few days later, Mr. Lilly was referred by MPD officials for a Psychological Fitness for Duty Evaluation,” the judge states in his ruling.

“Gloria Morote, a licensed clinical psychologist, evaluated Mr. Lilly on October 10, 2012, and October 24, 2012, alongside MPD referral documents informing her that ‘following a period of good service, Officer Lilly’s performance and appearance began to deteriorate in August/September 2012,’ including ‘two major investigations for neglect of duty,’ ‘deterioration’ in his mental condition, and ‘marked nervousness and erratic behavior while on-duty after exposure to bedbugs,’” the judge wrote in his ruling.

Over the next several months, the judge’s ruling states, Lilly continued to get into trouble for being late for work and other breaches of police rules leading up to May 22, 2013, when “Mr. Lilly was placed on administrative leave after ‘rambling’ with ‘glassy’ eyes to a commanding officer about being sent by his family to a ‘funny farm,’” Judge Sullivan continues in is ruling.

“Then, on May 31, 2013, Mr. Lilly self-admitted into Dominion Hospital, a mental health facility in Virginia, to receive psychiatric treatment,” Sullivan states.

He reports in his ruling that based on Lilly’s record of infractions of police rules and his mental health status, the Police and Firefighters’ Retirement and Relief Board (PFRRB) “ordered Mr. Lilly’s retirement, determining that he was incapacitated from further duty by reason of a disability incurred in the performance of duty, and his retirement took effect on August 16, 2013.”

Court records show that under this forced retirement order Lilly would receive 40 percent of his salary as part of his retirement benefit.

“Drawing every justifiable inference in Mr. Lilly’s favor, as the Court must do, it finds no basis under Title VII or the D.C. Human Rights Act upon which a reasonable fact finder could conclude that the District had discriminatory intent based on his gender and/or sexual orientation or was retaliating against him for taking part in a protected activity,” Sullivan concludes in his ruling. “Accordingly, the District’s Motion for Summary Judgement, EFC No. 45, is granted.”

The judge described his action as a “final appealable order,” which indicates that Lilly could appeal the ruling to the D.C. Court of Appeals. 

Lilly and his lawyer, Sameera Ali, couldn’t immediately be reached to determine whether Lilly plans to appeal the decision. 

Shortly after Lilly’s lawsuit was filed, officials with the MPD and the Office of the Attorney General declined to comment, saying they could not discuss issues surrounding a pending lawsuit. But then Assistant D.C. Police Chief Peter Newsham, who later became Chief of Police, told the Blade the department does not tolerate discrimination.

“I can’t talk about a specific lawsuit,” he said. “But I can tell you about how we don’t tolerate bias by any members of this police department,” said Newsham. “It’s something we take very seriously. And if we become aware of it, corrective action will be taken all the way up to removal if it was severe enough,” he said.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

Man charged with anti-gay assault in D.C. accepts plea offer

Community service offered in exchange for dismissing hate crime charge

Published

on

(Photo by Sergei Gnatuk via Bigstock)

A Germantown, Md., man arrested by D.C. police on a charge of simple assault with a hate crime designation for allegedly assaulting a gay man while using “homophobic slurs” has agreed to an offer by prosecutors to plead guilty to simple assault without the hate crime designation and with the promise of having the charge dismissed if he completes, among other requirements, 48 hours of community service work.

Dean Edmundson, 26, standing beside his attorney, officially accepted the offer of a Deferred Sentencing Agreement at an Aug. 18 status hearing in D.C. Superior Court after Senior Judge Hiram Puig-Lugo explained the details of the agreement and confirmed Edmundson’s decision to waive his right to a trial.

Among other things, the judge said the agreement offered by prosecutors with the Office of the United States Attorney for D.C. includes the requirement that he successfully completes 48 hours of community service work, stays away from the victim of the assault, writes a letter of apology to the victim, and does not violate any other laws or get into trouble for the next 12 months.

Puig-Lugo then announced he scheduled a sentencing hearing for Edmundson for Aug. 18, 2027, at which time a determination will made on whether he has fulfilled all the requirements under the agreement and whether the simple assault charge will be dismissed. The judge added that if it is determined that Edmundson did not fulfil the terms of the agreement the charge would remain in place and he could be sentenced to a possible maximum penalty of 180 days in jail and a $1,000 fine.

Edmundson, who appeared in court wearing a business suit with a dress shirt and tie, was released on his own recognizance following his arrest by D.C. police on Feb. 7, 2026.

Police and court records show he was initially charged by arresting officers with simple assault with a hate crime designation. In a statement announcing the arrest, D.C. police said, “On Saturday, Feb. 7, 2026, at approximately 7:45 p.m. the victim and suspect were in the 1500 block of 14th Street, Northwest. The suspect requested a ‘high five’ from the victim. The victim declined and kept walking,” the statement says.

A follow-up arrest affidavit filed by police states that Edmundson followed the victim and called him “bald, ugly, and gay,” and then “pushed the victim with both hands, shoving them, causing the victim to feel the force of the push.” The affidavit adds, “The victim stated that they felt offended and that they were also gay.”

According to the court records, the Office of the U.S. Attorney filed its official charge of simple assault against Edmunson on Feb. 9 without the hate crime designation. The office has not responded to a request by the Washington Blade for its reason for dropping the hate crime designation. The office has also not immediately responded to a follow-up inquiry from the Blade this week asking if prosecutors consulted the victim to obtain the victim’s thoughts about the plea offer.

The Blade, which has a policy of not disclosing the identify of crime victims in cases like this without their consent, could not immediately obtain contact information to reach the victim for comment.

Court records show that Edmundson rejected an earlier plea agreement offer by prosecutors and he was scheduled for a non-jury trial on Aug. 18. The records show his attorney filed a motion earlier this month asking the judge to convert the trial into status hearing on that same day after his client accepted the Deferred Sentencing Agreement offer by the U.S. Attorney’s office. The judge approved the motion without objection from prosecutors.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Comings & Goings

SMYAL names new program, development leaders

Published

on

From left, Carla Lester and Tad Czyzewski

The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected]

Congratulations to Carla Lester, LICSW on her new position as Chief Program Officer with SMYAL. Upon accepting the position she said, “SMYAL deeply aligns with my passion for honoring, protecting, and upholding the rights of all individuals, particularly LGBTQ+ youth and others who have been historically underserved, to belong to communities that affirm their identities, treat them with dignity and respect, and support their well-being. At this point in my career, I was ready to transition to an organization whose mission more closely reflected my values and was rooted in the community. SMYAL offered the opportunity to serve both an organization and a population whose mission not only resonates deeply with me but also intersects with my own multiple identities.”

Lester is a healthcare and human services executive with more than 20 years of experience in behavioral health, federal and state health insurance programs, housing, health care, education, and community-based services. She has held senior roles at Carelon Behavioral Health, Pathways to Housing and N Street Village, leading clinical programs, Housing First initiatives, homeless outreach, trauma-informed services, and integrated case management.

She earned master’s degrees in Social Work and Divinity, and maintains active clinical social work licenses in D.C. and Maryland.

Congratulations also to Tad Czyzewski on his new position as Chief Development Officer at SMYAL. On accepting the position, he said, “While I’ve spent much of my nonprofit career in the arts, the current social and political environments made me want to apply my skills and passion more directly toward supporting and strengthening our community. SMYAL and this role felt like the right place to do that.”

Czyzewski brings more than two decades of experience in nonprofit leadership and strategy, fundraising, and business development. Prior to joining SMYAL, he served for eight years as executive director of The Choral Arts Society of Washington, where he led fundraising, financial management, and community engagement. During his tenure, he helped raise more than $15 million in contributed revenue. He guided the organization through a major rebrand and the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Prior to that Czyzewski served as Business and Development Director for Washington Revels, and held leadership and advisory roles with Chorus America, the DC Commission on the Arts and Humanities, and the National Endowment for the Arts. He began his career in the corporate sector, including at Capital One, where his work in product development and marketing contributed to new financial products and more than $2 billion in deposits. 

Czyzewski is a lifelong musician, has performed professionally as a classical singer, including with the Washington National Opera and the National Symphony Orchestra. 

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Gay ANC commissioner sues D.C. over police ‘failure’ to pay reward money

Lawsuit says information led to conviction in murder, armed robbery cases

Published

on

D.C. Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner Tom Donohue (Washington Blade photo by Lou Chibbaro, Jr.)

Gay D.C. Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner Tom Donohue on Aug. 11 filed a lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court charging that D.C. police acted improperly and violated a local law by not paying him $30,000 in reward money for his role in helping police identify and arrest — and obtain the subsequent conviction — of one man charged with murder and another man charged with armed robbery in separate cases.

Although the lawsuit alleges improper action by D.C. police in carrying out the city’s Crime Solvers reward program, it names as defendants the District of Columbia and the Office of the Attorney General for D.C., which, among other things, defends the city against lawsuits.

Donohue, who is a member of the city’s ANC Rainbow Caucus consisting of LGBTQ elected ANC members, held a news conference outside the D.C. Superior Court building on Aug. 11 to talk about the lawsuit before entering the courthouse to officially file it.

The lawsuit states that Donohue “provided key video evidence that led to the arrest and conviction” of a man initially charged with first degree murder for allegedly running over a bicyclist with his car after the two got into an argument.

The lawsuit states that police had offered a $25,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the defendant in that case, but police “arbitrarily slashed the payment to $5,000 without prior notice or policy justification.”

Court records show that D.C. resident Eric Beasley was charged with first degree murder for killing David Farewell, 45, by hitting him with his car on Sept. 4, 2020, on the 2100 block of Young Street, S.E. The records show the evidence for the case was based in large part on video camera footage of the incident obtained by police. Donohoe has said he provided that video camera evidence.

The records show that during Beasley’s October 2023 trial a jury was unable to reach the required unanimous verdict, and the judge declared a mistrial.

According to the records, Beasley later agreed to an offer by prosecutors to plead guilty to a lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter and was sentenced in September 2024 to eight years in prison, a development that angered the victim’s family members who called it a “slap on the wrist,” according to a Fox 5 News report.

Donohue’s lawsuit says the second case in which he provided police with pivotal information involved a series of armed robberies known as the Fairlawn Serial Armed Robbery Spree that occurred in the Fairlawn neighborhood in Southeast D.C. in 2023 near where Donohue lives.   

The lawsuit says evidence consisting of video surveillance footage provided by Donohue to police enabled police to determine they initially wrongfully arrested an 18-year-old male for the robberies. “Using Plaintiff’s security video, MPD identified, arrested, and convicted the actual robber, David Crocker, who was sentenced to 18 years in federal prison,” the lawsuit states.

It says one of the detectives investigating the case recommended a $10,000 reward for Donohue’s help in the case based on the police Crime Solvers reward program. The detective’s recommendation was approved by then-Assistant D.C. Police Chief Kyle Ramey on Aug. 4, 2025, according to the lawsuit. 

But it adds, “Nevertheless, MPD improperly withheld payment.” 

When contacted by the Washington Blade for comment on Donohue’s lawsuit allegations, a D.C. police spokesperson said “MPD does not comment on pending or ongoing litigation.” 

Gabriel Shoglow-Rubenstein, who serves as press secretary for the D.C. Office of the Attorney General, which will be defending the city against the Donohue lawsuit, said he would look into obtaining a possible comment but said the office has a similar longstanding policy of not commenting on pending litigation.

“This action arises from the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department’s arbitrary, bad-faith, and legally unsupportable failure to honor its public reward promises and administrative obligations to Plaintiff,” the lawsuit states.

It says the MPD violated the city’s Freedom of Information Act or FOIA law by not responding to Donohue’s request for information and documents related to the decision not to pay him the full reward money.

“MPD’s reduction of Plaintiff’s homicide reward from $25,000 to $5,000, and its withholding of his approved $10,00 robbery reward, were undertaken completely devoid of written standards, making such decisions inherently arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of administrative discretion,” it says.

It calls for Donohue to be awarded $30,000 in compensatory damages consisting of the $20,000 “unpaid balance” for the homicide case reward and $10,000 for the robbery case reward. It also calls for reimbursement for “reasonable” litigation costs and attorney’s fees. Donohue told the Washington Blade that at this time he is representing himself without an attorney.

Donohue told the Blade that the refusal by D.C. police to pay him the full reward money also limited his plans to donate some of that money to the family of murder victim David Farewell to help pay for a burial stone. He said that due to the family’s limited resources Farewell is buried in an unmarked grave

Continue Reading

Popular