A look at what's going on in Trinidad, on H Street, and in the larger area north of Capitol Hill.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Shooting in 1400 Block of H Street
The older brother of Deonte Rawlings died after he was shot multiple times as he boarded the X2 bus around 11:40am. The Post reports. The shooting occurred at the bus stop near Rags 2 Riches.
48 comments:
ro
said...
very sad. but i couldn't help notice that the Post article quotes the police as saying there were no other passengers on the bus at the time? is this the X2 we're talking about or some phantom bus I've never heard of.
Wow, it looks like he was a witness in the Halloween shooting. It says he didn't seek police protection because of what happened to DeOnte. Can't say I blame him. I don't think I'd trust the people who shot my brother in the back of the head. The police look really bad right now, but that's nothing new.
I can believe that people jump off of the bus. I think that I would have. I couldn't believe it when they said the bus was empty. The X2 is never empty on H Street. An empty X2 would be suspect.
So you think the "police look bad," Zachary? Maybe they might have been a better bet under the circumstances. This guy saw a friend get murdered on Oct. 31, then he got gunned down in cold blood in broad daylight on a busy street corner eleven days later. Yeah, coming from the funeral.
There are probably people who attended that funeral service who KNOW who killed these two people. None of this will ever stop until they start turning them in. No one will be safe. Ever. Until they do. There will just be more dead people.
Hate to say it, but this only makes "the police look bad" among folks who will never, ever believe that a police force has any legitimacy. Which is one of the reasons that subculture is ripping itself apart.
Bottom line is, for everyone else, the Feds investigated the DeOnte Rawlings shooting, and found the off-duty cops were justified in using deadly force. For your average rational citizen, that's good enough.
Folks who believe there was some sort of conspiracy by a couple of off-duty cops to intentionally execute some teenager over a mini-bike will quite literally believe *anything* negative about anyone in a position of authority.
This is a tragedy for the family of the victim and for our neighborhood. How many people need to be executed in your block before you rise up? Do not accept this as normal. It is not. It never is. These murderers felt no fear carrying out their act during broad daylight, in front of businesses and other passengers. For all of us who wish to see H street and DC revitalized, this is a tragedy that must not be accepted.
Has the community considered installing cameras in this area for safety purposes? Do they work?
I believe it is less mismanagement of a police force, and more mismanagement of the ghetto culture that protects and celebrates the criminal activity as a cornerstone of said "culture."
My guess is this one of the few murders that will get solved. I was talking with a bus driver yesterday and he said there are cameras on the outside of buses as well as inside. So my hope is that they got the killer on video.
so the thugs are killing each other off. That's one way to improve the neighborhood.
^ ^ this person is not a "thug" from all reports, but allegedly the witness to a crime. take off those racial generalizing blinders you're wearing and actually try to read the stories to which you respond.
^ ^ or he might have been killed the day AFTER halloween. they killed this guy because they thought he *might* assist a murder investigation, allegedly. if they knew he *was* assisting said investigation, i imagine they would have killed him a week earlier. you might want to get yourself a better understanding of how the criminal subculture works before you respond to a story like this. LOL @ thinking that helping the cops makes people safer....maybe in a city with an effective witness protection program for local witnesses, wherever that mythical place might be.
dcjaded, let's hope. It sounds like there may have been 2-3 shooters on this one. Getting these guys off the street would be a big deal. While I'm not particularly concerned that one of them will shoot me, I don't sleep easy knowing these people are roaming free on the street. Daytime shootings are particularly disturbing. The fact that they could have killed the bus drivers or others (let alone the intended victim that they did kill) is pretty messed up. Let's hope it is solved soon, and all of the shooters locked up.
Bottom line is, for everyone else, the Feds investigated the DeOnte Rawlings shooting, and found the off-duty cops were justified in using deadly force. For your average rational citizen, that's good enough.
^ ^ Average rational citizen? First of all, having a healthy cynicism for "official reports" is not necessarily an irrational position, if you're old enough to see how many "official reports" were later shot full of holes by investigative journalists, whistleblowers and subsequent releases of new information. Second of all, people who in an argument or discussion lump themselves in with the "rational" people are making a thinly veiled ad hominem attack on their opposition (who are, by implication, all thereby painted as irrational). Surely you were taught how to make your point in a more enlightened fashion by some fair-minded instructor in a school somewhere...
LOL @ thinking that helping the cops makes people safer....maybe in a city with an effective witness protection program for local witnesses, wherever that mythical place might be.
^ ^ ps: when i say "makes people safer", I'm specifically referring to the potential witnesses. Obviously, in an ideal world, being a witness would make *everyone* safer. Sadly, we are in DC, not necessarily an ideal world.
Soul Searcher, you are such an expert on ghetto culture. I sure do appreciate all your insight, bro. I haven't witnessed any crimes lately, but if I do, can I sit next to you on the bus? You seem so knowledgable. Is it better to sit in the front or the back of the bus? Miss. Parks says the front, but your vantage point sounds like it's coming from the back. Just keepin' real my Soul Man.
Dear Soul Searcher, Please read this article from today's Washington Times that recounts the criminal records of both George Rawlings, who was gunned down on H Street, and Ashton Hunter, who was murdered on Oct 31. Neither was exactly Rhodes Scholars who got caught in the crossfire. They were habitual criminals with multiple felony gun possession charges between them. Maybe Rite-Aid has a special on Band-Aids for your bleeding heart, but, in this case, they may have reaped what they sowed.
Average rational citizen? First of all, having a healthy cynicism for "official reports" is not necessarily an irrational position, if you're old enough to see how many "official reports" were later shot full of holes by investigative journalists, whistleblowers and subsequent releases of new information.
True, but there was a full investigation of the shooting by the FBI, *and* the US Attorney's office, *and* a subsequent investigation by MPD.
In the absence of any compelling evidence whatsoever, I'm afraid I'm going to have to stand by my original characterization.
There are folks out there for whom police are simply a bunch of murderers--worse than the criminals, no less--and that position is an irrational one.
The fact that there was a "report" on the Kennedy assassination, and that there have been, throughout history, incidents of misleading "reports", does not ipso facto invalidate the findings of the Warren Report.
True, but there was a full investigation of the shooting by the FBI, *and* the US Attorney's office, *and* a subsequent investigation by MPD.
^ ^ if i recall correctly, they still have no murder weapon and there was no gunpowder residue on rawlings' hands, from every report i've heard. what these reports likely concluded was that they couldn't prove the officer's story false, not that they verified his account, which they can't demonstrably do without a weapon or evidence that rawlings fired a handgun (gunpowder residue). if you have information to the contrary, feel free to bring it up. otherwise those reports conclusively prove nothing.
"In the absence of any compelling evidence whatsoever,"
^ ^ what you seem to fail to realize is that these reports you are citing provide "no compelling evidence whatsoever" that deonte rawlings shot anyone. absent that proof of *his* action in the case, there is still rational reason to doubt the officer's story. the officials you cite have, to my knowledge, never released the contents of their reports, so you (unless you're one of the agents who performed the investigation) have no "compelling evidence" upon which to base your conclusion that a "rational person" has no reason to doubt the results of said unreleased investigatory studies. a rational person certainly can doubt a report whose conclusion is released, but not its reasoning.
link to a q&a with a post reporter who has followed the case closely. lots of missing info in the rawlings case that give a skeptic rational reason to question how the investigators behind the study reached their conclusions.
nothing in the story you linked is contrary to the allegation that rawlings was shot because his assailants believed he would report what he saw to the police. to the contrary, they quote rawlings' family lawyer as regards this theoretical motive and quote no source contradicting this possible motive.
ps: having multiple felony charges (not convictions, by the way) against you does NOT somehow justify a person being murdered to prevent them from speaking to the police about a murder.
so, saying all that to say, how does this link you posted in any way discount anything i have said in this thread? oh, you mean it doesn't? okay.
oh i get it, you were trying to respond to my characterization of the victim as a slain witness instead of a thug. i get it. unfortunately, rawlings' arrest record seems to have little to do with his slaying here, unless you can come up with a source to the contrary, what's your point again? that people with arrest records deserve to be gunned down on buses?
i guess i should acknowledge that although the times story references 10 felony and misdemeanor charges, it also notes one conviction which landed rawlings in federal court (without listing the charge?). so, as to not appear as if i am avoiding that fact by mentioning the multiple arrests also mentioned.
seems strange that the times didn't describe the charges against rawlings, even though they were quite descriptive when laying out the charges against hunter (gun charges, assault, etc)
wonder why that was?
they also put the shooting at 13th and H instead of 14th, two corners which quite far from one another
as a side note, does anyone know why certain blocks on h st are so much longer than others, historically?
"Many of the current methods are susceptible to outside interferences that can produce false positive or false negative results. For example, most tests require the presence of lead for a valid reading, including two of the three mainstays of residue analysis -- the sodium rhodizonate test and scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive x-ray detection. But Burleson points out that lead is disappearing from ammunition. That potentially toxic metal poses environmental hazards at outdoor firing ranges, where it can leach into groundwater. In response, manufacturers have begun to create safer, environmentally friendly ammunition out of other metals, such as zinc and aluminum alloys. This recent trend toward lead-free ammunition, Burleson said, has decreased reliability of gun shot residue analysis and created the need for smarter tests to identify more diverse components of residue in gunpowder, including elements like stabilizers and plasticizers, which are added in the powder during the manufacturing process for safety reasons"
This kind of armchair forensics BS usually ends in unproductive places like Moon Landing conspiracies, 9/11 Trutherism, and other effluvia.
Sorry, but there's a name for folks who think an intricate web of conspiracy--involving the MPD, the DOJ, and the US Attorney's Office--is bent on destroying them.
oboe: did the investigations by the FBI and the US Attorney's office conclude that the MPD's version of events was correct? Or did they conclude that they had no evidence that it was incorrect? There is a huge, huge difference between those two statements.
If the former is what was concluded, then you're right: to doubt the official version of events is to believe that the FBI and the US Attorney are both attempting to hide the truth of what happened, which seems a little nutty and enters the realm of conspiracy theories.
But if the latter is what was concluded, then maintaining a distrust of the official version of events isn't believing in any kind of conspiracy, and it's disingenuous of you to suggest it does.
Normally, I try and avoid commenting on tragedies such as this on frozentropics but I find soulsearcher's overall comments to be disturbing -- if for no other reason that they betray a deeply cynical attitude toward law enforcement that seems to be pernicious in this town.
I especially find the comment "LOL @ thinking that helping the cops makes people safer" to be especially ignorant.
Let me ask you soulsearcher, putting all the BS side arguments aside for the moment -- how else are we going to protect our communities if we don't help the police? Are the criminals going to protect us? Are the 18 kids running around with guns and rap sheets a mile long going to protect us? (please spare me the babe in the woods routine that all these kids were just innocent little angels who were not running with the wrong circles)
The problem with your comment about helping the police is that it is just a variation on the "don't snitch" and "don't trust the police" attitude that pervades this city and just leads to more crime.
I think you seriously need to re-evaluate where you are coming from in all this and not get bogged down with these "the man is out to get you" conspiracy theories.
What I know is that a kid died in a very tragic manner. And it happened in my neighborhood. So yeah, you can bet any chance I get to help the police prevent crime in my neighorhood (whether its snitching or just watching my block and my neighbors houses) you're damn right I'm going to help the police do that.
Over the last week, many residents have asked me what can they do to stop crime. My answer - attend the Police Service Area 102 monthly meetings held on the second Tuesday of the month. Why? MPD officers attend this meeting to discuss with residents crime statistics, trends and more important - solutions. And, just going to one meeting after a high profile crime(s) will not be enough. If people feel this strongly about making the H Street neighborhood safer, please add this to your calendar. Perhaps treat it as a real life TIVO show. I don't want to sound simple, but I have seen what a dozen or so residents can do if they band together and work a problem for a few years (ban on singles, H Street Renovation to name a few).
This is why the PSA 102 boundaries where drawn this way a few years back - to put H Street in one PSA so that problems can be addressed.
PSA 102 meetings happen the second Tuesday of each month. 7-8:30 p.m. Sherwood Recreation Center, 10th and G Streets NE
First District Yahoo Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MPD-1D/ MPD
dear jjsaid you sound dumb ass shit talkin bout ima help the popo to keep my hood safe! go on and do so and see wont you be next cause ppl in the hood dont care bout da helpin the popo.the way i see it fuck the feds. and rest in peace to all my homies lil lip (Deonta),George,and Do Whop (Ashton).
If you read today's Washington Examiner, it says that George Rawlings was about to be arrested in connection with the Halloween murder. It states that he either drove or supplied the getaway vehicle. Interesting article. It puts a whole new spin on this story.
Thank you for the link to the article. I was out of town for the Haloween weekend and did not realize their was a shooting in DC. I thought Ashton Hunter was the young man who was killed by gunfire at the Haloween party in Maryland (someone rented a mansion - one died, one victim paralyzed).
The article sheds light on the story which if it is true seems to conclude the shooting was part of an internal gang fight.
^ ^ i don't think you understand the crux of my position. i never said GNR tests are 100% reliable, i said the absence of ANY evidence that a gun was fired raises doubt regarding the officer's version of events; the presence of gunpowder residue would be *some* evidence (although not conclusive) that a gun *may* have been fired by deonte and would back the officer's story.
if the theory is that deonte fired a handgun and the officer acted in self-defense, one would expect professional investigators to locate *some* proof that a handgun was fired, such as (1) a handgun (2) some proof that he fired a handgun (and even though gunpowder residue tests are not 100% reliable, they still are *some* form of evidence (although they can be challenged in court). if someone has SOME gunpowder residue on their person, it raises the INFERENCE that they may have fired a gun. absent such evidence, how does one establish a handgun was fired, pray tell, other than merely relying on the eyewitness testimony of parties in the vicinity...in this case, the eyewitnesses were implicated in the shooting (the officers) and they have an inherent bias...
this is not "moon landing theory", it is questioning the conclusions of a report based on thin evidence, said report remaining unreleased
i say all this to say, YOU have no additional information to add, which makes YOU sound like the wild theorist, not me...I am expressing doubt regarding conclusions where reasoning has not been offered other than (apparently) the eyewitness accounts of the parties accused of possible wrongdoing...
it is quite reasonable to suspect conclusions based on the eyewitness testimony of the accused...absent other evidence which you are clearly unable to provide
I especially find the comment "LOL @ thinking that helping the cops makes people safer" to be especially ignorant.
^ ^ if you read my subsequent qualifier explaining that my use of the term "people" referred specifically to "witnesses to a crime in DC" and still think so, I think you are the one who is especially ignorant to the rampant failure of DC to protect eyewitnesses from retaliation. maybe you should ask around the H Street area about the history of witness intimidation around here.
"Let me ask you soulsearcher, putting all the BS side arguments aside for the moment -- how else are we going to protect our communities if we don't help the police? Are the criminals going to protect us?"
^ ^ I'm saying that realistically in DC in 2009, the police CANT help you if you're a witness. They are outnumbered and outgunned by criminals who are determined to intimidate witnesses. If you're willing to take your life in your own hands, good luck, but indeed LOL @ anyone who thinks it is "safer" to talk to the police than it is *not* to, in our current environment. People willing to commit murder in broad daylight to silence witnesses are inherently dangerous to testify against. Do you disagree with this statement?
"The problem with your comment about helping the police is that it is just a variation on the "don't snitch" and "don't trust the police" attitude that pervades this city and just leads to more crime. "
^ ^ I *never* said "don't trust the police" and nothing I said is a variation of that. I said it's unsafe to testify against people willing to murder witnesses, because unfortunately this city does not have the resources to properly protect witnesses in cases where they are in mortal danger (note: there have been many witnesses who have successfully testified, so this is by no means a universal rule, but clearly it is safer to not cooperate at all in very specific cases where the perps are willing to kill witnesses...to say otherwise is to ignore the obvious).
Now, as for smaller crimes like witnessing car break-ins, burglaries, etc, by all means, dial 911 immediately, but if you witness a drug or other premeditated murder in DC and the murderers see *you* witness the murder in progress? cooperating in that narrow circumstance is HIGHLY dangerous in DC and most other cities, as well.
I think you seriously need to re-evaluate where you are coming from in all this and not get bogged down with these "the man is out to get you" conspiracy theories.
What I know is that a kid died in a very tragic manner. And it happened in my neighborhood. So yeah, you can bet any chance I get to help the police prevent crime in my neighorhood (whether its snitching or just watching my block and my neighbors houses) you're damn right I'm going to help the police do that.
The more you post the more convoluted your points become.
First off, I did read your posts -- several times. You can back-track from or re-qualify your statements all you want but they still betray a general distrust of the police without any solid foundation or evidence.
For example, where is your evidence to support your contention that the "police can't help you if you're a witness"? In the case of this boy who was killed, he didn't even attempt to seek out police protection. But even putting that aside, where is evidence to support your general allegation that there has been "rampant failure" by DCPD to protect witnesses?
Indeed, your comment that "LOL @ anyone who thinks it is "safer" to talk to the police than it is *not* to" is clearly contracted by the most recent murder of this boy. He did not talk to the police, did not seek the police's protection about the Halloween murder and the gangbangers shot him anyway!! How is that for "safer"?
Again, I think you need to seriously re-evaluate where you are coming from. Are you making a point based on facts or are you making a point based on opinions about the cops that are not supported by the facts? It seems to me the gist of all of your posts is to either a.) question the truthfulness of the police or b.) flat out undermine any reason to help the police without any evidence to support your contentions.
This is an irrational attitude that a lot of people have in this town and, to be frank, this is the kind of attitude that, taken in the aggregate, encourages crime in a community. Bottom line -- if you don't help the police when you see a crime, you are just asking for more crime. Period.
i've only lived here for twelve years, but i've had my experiences.
i remember one time when a cop was late to a crime scene (that i, amongst others, had called in), and he said that he had more important business to deal with in SE DC.... some woman who was threatening to kill her kid. apparently, they "talked her down" and then came to the three car accident.
anyway, you're deluding yourself if you think that DC cops are the answer to crime in this city.
they're not.
they're a useful aid in combating crime, but they're not the answer. if you truly believe that they are the answer, i want to hire you for a firm i know.... they'll be bankrupt in a few months, but you'll feel really good about yourself!
"First off, I did read your posts -- several times. You can back-track from or re-qualify your statements all you want but they still betray a general distrust of the police without any solid foundation or evidence."
For example, where is your evidence to support your contention that the "police can't help you if you're a witness"?
^ ^ what does that quote have to do with "general distrust of the police"? that has to do with the plain fact that there are more criminals than police officers, as one can tell by contrasting the number of police officers we have and the number of people convicted of committing crimes in DC (a fraction of the total criminal population, clearly, since crime continues while they are gone). the police can't be everywhere. i never said "the police don't *want* to protect witnesses". stop reading into what i write and pulling out the meaning you're looking for.
Turns out the 'innocent witness' George Rawlings had a 9mm and a bottle of PCP with him when he was killed, according to the Washington Post and the police report.
And apparently he was involved in the shooting of the guy he was attending the funeral for. Not a witness. A participant.
Maybe that had something to do with him not seeking police protection? Perhaps he was a bit more fond of his gun and PCP.
Sortof makes the Rawlings family attorney, what, a liar? So can we expect a clarification from him now?
Actually, the story doesn't say that he was involved in the killing. It says that the alleged killers of Rawlings thought he was -- correctly or incorrectly, we don't know --and suggests that retaliation was the motivation for his killing.
MPD doesn't seem to think he pulled the trigger, because they already had someone in custody for that.
Well if you're convinced that people are trying to kill you, I can see wanting to carry a pistol. A concern that was not unreasonable from what we've seen.
"Well if you're convinced that people are trying to kill you, I can see wanting to carry a pistol. A concern that was not unreasonable from what we've seen."
And I guess the PCP was for medicinal purposes only?
How about this instead?
How about seek police or DEA protection (of course, you'd have to ditch the PCP at least temporarily).
How about leave town?
Going to a public funeral where you know involved parties will be, then endangering actual innocent civilians on a public street and bus afterward, whilst toting a gun and drugs (particularly PCP, not exactly a benign drug), that ain't really the way to go.
Like it or not, this kid was a thug. He endangered the lives of innocent people, and he had a rap sheet longer than my internet-dating-site penis measurement.
Are you still arguing that 'the police look really bad right now'?
48 comments:
very sad. but i couldn't help notice that the Post article quotes the police as saying there were no other passengers on the bus at the time? is this the X2 we're talking about or some phantom bus I've never heard of.
WJLA Reports that other passengers jumped over the body to get off the bus.
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1109/677167.html
Wow, it looks like he was a witness in the Halloween shooting. It says he didn't seek police protection because of what happened to DeOnte. Can't say I blame him. I don't think I'd trust the people who shot my brother in the back of the head. The police look really bad right now, but that's nothing new.
I can believe that people jump off of the bus. I think that I would have. I couldn't believe it when they said the bus was empty. The X2 is never empty on H Street. An empty X2 would be suspect.
So you think the "police look bad," Zachary? Maybe they might have been a better bet under the circumstances.
This guy saw a friend get murdered on Oct. 31, then he got gunned down in cold blood in broad daylight on a busy street corner eleven days later. Yeah, coming from the funeral.
There are probably people who attended that funeral service who KNOW who killed these two people.
None of this will ever stop until they start turning them in. No one will be safe. Ever.
Until they do. There will just be more dead people.
Again... mismanagement of the police force and continual acceptance of violence as a fact of city life.
One wonders if things will ever really change.
so the thugs are killing each other off. That's one way to improve the neighborhood.
Hate to say it, but this only makes "the police look bad" among folks who will never, ever believe that a police force has any legitimacy. Which is one of the reasons that subculture is ripping itself apart.
Bottom line is, for everyone else, the Feds investigated the DeOnte Rawlings shooting, and found the off-duty cops were justified in using deadly force. For your average rational citizen, that's good enough.
Folks who believe there was some sort of conspiracy by a couple of off-duty cops to intentionally execute some teenager over a mini-bike will quite literally believe *anything* negative about anyone in a position of authority.
This is a tragedy for the family of the victim and for our neighborhood. How many people need to be executed in your block before you rise up? Do not accept this as normal. It is not. It never is. These murderers felt no fear carrying out their act during broad daylight, in front of businesses and other passengers. For all of us who wish to see H street and DC revitalized, this is a tragedy that must not be accepted.
Has the community considered installing cameras in this area for safety purposes? Do they work?
I believe it is less mismanagement of a police force, and more mismanagement of the ghetto culture that protects and celebrates the criminal activity as a cornerstone of said "culture."
Think, if he snitched, he may well be alive.
My guess is this one of the few murders that will get solved. I was talking with a bus driver yesterday and he said there are cameras on the outside of buses as well as inside. So my hope is that they got the killer on video.
so the thugs are killing each other off. That's one way to improve the neighborhood.
^ ^ this person is not a "thug" from all reports, but allegedly the witness to a crime. take off those racial generalizing blinders you're wearing and actually try to read the stories to which you respond.
Think, if he snitched, he may well be alive.
^ ^ or he might have been killed the day AFTER halloween. they killed this guy because they thought he *might* assist a murder investigation, allegedly. if they knew he *was* assisting said investigation, i imagine they would have killed him a week earlier. you might want to get yourself a better understanding of how the criminal subculture works before you respond to a story like this. LOL @ thinking that helping the cops makes people safer....maybe in a city with an effective witness protection program for local witnesses, wherever that mythical place might be.
dcjaded,
let's hope. It sounds like there may have been 2-3 shooters on this one. Getting these guys off the street would be a big deal. While I'm not particularly concerned that one of them will shoot me, I don't sleep easy knowing these people are roaming free on the street. Daytime shootings are particularly disturbing. The fact that they could have killed the bus drivers or others (let alone the intended victim that they did kill) is pretty messed up. Let's hope it is solved soon, and all of the shooters locked up.
Bottom line is, for everyone else, the Feds investigated the DeOnte Rawlings shooting, and found the off-duty cops were justified in using deadly force. For your average rational citizen, that's good enough.
^ ^ Average rational citizen? First of all, having a healthy cynicism for "official reports" is not necessarily an irrational position, if you're old enough to see how many "official reports" were later shot full of holes by investigative journalists, whistleblowers and subsequent releases of new information. Second of all, people who in an argument or discussion lump themselves in with the "rational" people are making a thinly veiled ad hominem attack on their opposition (who are, by implication, all thereby painted as irrational). Surely you were taught how to make your point in a more enlightened fashion by some fair-minded instructor in a school somewhere...
LOL @ thinking that helping the cops makes people safer....maybe in a city with an effective witness protection program for local witnesses, wherever that mythical place might be.
^ ^ ps: when i say "makes people safer", I'm specifically referring to the potential witnesses. Obviously, in an ideal world, being a witness would make *everyone* safer. Sadly, we are in DC, not necessarily an ideal world.
Soul Searcher, you are such an expert on ghetto culture. I sure do appreciate all your insight, bro. I haven't witnessed any crimes lately, but if I do, can I sit next to you on the bus? You seem so knowledgable. Is it better to sit in the front or the back of the bus? Miss. Parks says the front, but your vantage point sounds like it's coming from the back. Just keepin' real my Soul Man.
Dear Soul Searcher,
Please read this article from today's Washington Times that recounts the criminal records of both George Rawlings, who was gunned down on H Street, and Ashton Hunter, who was murdered on Oct 31.
Neither was exactly Rhodes Scholars who got caught in the crossfire.
They were habitual criminals with multiple felony gun possession charges between them.
Maybe Rite-Aid has a special on Band-Aids for your bleeding heart, but, in this case, they may have reaped what they sowed.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/12/dc-teen-killed-after-anothers-funeral/
Average rational citizen? First of all, having a healthy cynicism for "official reports" is not necessarily an irrational position, if you're old enough to see how many "official reports" were later shot full of holes by investigative journalists, whistleblowers and subsequent releases of new information.
True, but there was a full investigation of the shooting by the FBI, *and* the US Attorney's office, *and* a subsequent investigation by MPD.
In the absence of any compelling evidence whatsoever, I'm afraid I'm going to have to stand by my original characterization.
There are folks out there for whom police are simply a bunch of murderers--worse than the criminals, no less--and that position is an irrational one.
The fact that there was a "report" on the Kennedy assassination, and that there have been, throughout history, incidents of misleading "reports", does not ipso facto invalidate the findings of the Warren Report.
True, but there was a full investigation of the shooting by the FBI, *and* the US Attorney's office, *and* a subsequent investigation by MPD.
^ ^ if i recall correctly, they still have no murder weapon and there was no gunpowder residue on rawlings' hands, from every report i've heard. what these reports likely concluded was that they couldn't prove the officer's story false, not that they verified his account, which they can't demonstrably do without a weapon or evidence that rawlings fired a handgun (gunpowder residue). if you have information to the contrary, feel free to bring it up. otherwise those reports conclusively prove nothing.
"In the absence of any compelling evidence whatsoever,"
^ ^ what you seem to fail to realize is that these reports you are citing provide "no compelling evidence whatsoever" that deonte rawlings shot anyone. absent that proof of *his* action in the case, there is still rational reason to doubt the officer's story. the officials you cite have, to my knowledge, never released the contents of their reports, so you (unless you're one of the agents who performed the investigation) have no "compelling evidence" upon which to base your conclusion that a "rational person" has no reason to doubt the results of said unreleased investigatory studies. a rational person certainly can doubt a report whose conclusion is released, but not its reasoning.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2009/04/19/DI2009041900774.html
link to a q&a with a post reporter who has followed the case closely. lots of missing info in the rawlings case that give a skeptic rational reason to question how the investigators behind the study reached their conclusions.
anon @ 6:41,
nothing in the story you linked is contrary to the allegation that rawlings was shot because his assailants believed he would report what he saw to the police. to the contrary, they quote rawlings' family lawyer as regards this theoretical motive and quote no source contradicting this possible motive.
ps: having multiple felony charges (not convictions, by the way) against you does NOT somehow justify a person being murdered to prevent them from speaking to the police about a murder.
so, saying all that to say, how does this link you posted in any way discount anything i have said in this thread? oh, you mean it doesn't? okay.
anon @ 6:41,
oh i get it, you were trying to respond to my characterization of the victim as a slain witness instead of a thug. i get it. unfortunately, rawlings' arrest record seems to have little to do with his slaying here, unless you can come up with a source to the contrary, what's your point again? that people with arrest records deserve to be gunned down on buses?
i guess i should acknowledge that although the times story references 10 felony and misdemeanor charges, it also notes one conviction which landed rawlings in federal court (without listing the charge?). so, as to not appear as if i am avoiding that fact by mentioning the multiple arrests also mentioned.
seems strange that the times didn't describe the charges against rawlings, even though they were quite descriptive when laying out the charges against hunter (gun charges, assault, etc)
wonder why that was?
they also put the shooting at 13th and H instead of 14th, two corners which quite far from one another
as a side note, does anyone know why certain blocks on h st are so much longer than others, historically?
If i recall correctly, they still have no murder weapon and there was no gunpowder residue on rawlings' hands
GSR tests are notoriously unreliable:
"Many of the current methods are susceptible to outside interferences that can produce false positive or false negative results. For example, most tests require the presence of lead for a valid reading, including two of the three mainstays of residue analysis -- the sodium rhodizonate test and scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive x-ray detection.
But Burleson points out that lead is disappearing from ammunition. That potentially toxic metal poses environmental hazards at outdoor firing ranges, where it can leach into groundwater. In response, manufacturers have begun to create safer, environmentally friendly ammunition out of other metals, such as zinc and aluminum alloys.
This recent trend toward lead-free ammunition, Burleson said, has decreased reliability of gun shot residue analysis and created the need for smarter tests to identify more diverse components of residue in gunpowder, including elements like stabilizers and plasticizers, which are added in the powder during the manufacturing process for safety reasons"
This kind of armchair forensics BS usually ends in unproductive places like Moon Landing conspiracies, 9/11 Trutherism, and other effluvia.
Sorry, but there's a name for folks who think an intricate web of conspiracy--involving the MPD, the DOJ, and the US Attorney's Office--is bent on destroying them.
And it ain't "skeptical."
oboe: did the investigations by the FBI and the US Attorney's office conclude that the MPD's version of events was correct? Or did they conclude that they had no evidence that it was incorrect? There is a huge, huge difference between those two statements.
If the former is what was concluded, then you're right: to doubt the official version of events is to believe that the FBI and the US Attorney are both attempting to hide the truth of what happened, which seems a little nutty and enters the realm of conspiracy theories.
But if the latter is what was concluded, then maintaining a distrust of the official version of events isn't believing in any kind of conspiracy, and it's disingenuous of you to suggest it does.
So, which did they conclude?
Normally, I try and avoid commenting on tragedies such as this on frozentropics but I find soulsearcher's overall comments to be disturbing -- if for no other reason that they betray a deeply cynical attitude toward law enforcement that seems to be pernicious in this town.
I especially find the comment "LOL @ thinking that helping the cops makes people safer" to be especially ignorant.
Let me ask you soulsearcher, putting all the BS side arguments aside for the moment -- how else are we going to protect our communities if we don't help the police? Are the criminals going to protect us? Are the 18 kids running around with guns and rap sheets a mile long going to protect us? (please spare me the babe in the woods routine that all these kids were just innocent little angels who were not running with the wrong circles)
The problem with your comment about helping the police is that it is just a variation on the "don't snitch" and "don't trust the police" attitude that pervades this city and just leads to more crime.
I think you seriously need to re-evaluate where you are coming from in all this and not get bogged down with these "the man is out to get you" conspiracy theories.
What I know is that a kid died in a very tragic manner. And it happened in my neighborhood. So yeah, you can bet any chance I get to help the police prevent crime in my neighorhood (whether its snitching or just watching my block and my neighbors houses) you're damn right I'm going to help the police do that.
It takes a village.
Over the last week, many residents have asked me what can they do to stop crime. My answer - attend the Police Service Area 102 monthly meetings held on the second Tuesday of the month. Why? MPD officers attend this meeting to discuss with residents crime statistics, trends and more important - solutions. And, just going to one meeting after a high profile crime(s) will not be enough. If people feel this strongly about making the H Street neighborhood safer, please add this to your calendar. Perhaps treat it as a real life TIVO show. I don't want to sound simple, but I have seen what a dozen or so residents can do if they band together and work a problem for a few years (ban on singles, H Street Renovation to name a few).
This is why the PSA 102 boundaries where drawn this way a few years back - to put H Street in one PSA so that problems can be addressed.
PSA 102 meetings happen the second Tuesday of each month. 7-8:30 p.m. Sherwood Recreation Center, 10th and G Streets NE
First District Yahoo Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MPD-1D/
MPD
dear jjsaid you sound dumb ass shit talkin bout ima help the popo to keep my hood safe! go on and do so and see wont you be next cause ppl in the hood dont care bout da helpin the popo.the way i see it fuck the feds. and rest in peace to all my homies lil lip (Deonta),George,and Do Whop (Ashton).
I can't tell if the previous anonymous poster was being obnoxious and satirical with the horrible grammar and "ghetto speak" or not.
Hope so, since it's not cool to threaten people on this or any other blog!
Anon@10:25:
Damn, I hope you're a 50-year-old white supremecist troll living in Centreville, 'cause if not, that's some ignorant-ass shit, right there. Heh.
Anyway, more on Rawlings here:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/crime/Shooting-victim-implicated-in-Halloween-murder_-police-say-8521368-69917437.html
Probably just more propaganda from the blood-thirsty MPD child-killers though...
If you read today's Washington Examiner, it says that George Rawlings was about to be arrested in connection with the Halloween murder. It states that he either drove or supplied the getaway vehicle. Interesting article. It puts a whole new spin on this story.
Oboe,
Thank you for the link to the article. I was out of town for the Haloween weekend and did not realize their was a shooting in DC. I thought Ashton Hunter was the young man who was killed by gunfire at the Haloween party in Maryland (someone rented a mansion - one died, one victim paralyzed).
The article sheds light on the story which if it is true seems to conclude the shooting was part of an internal gang fight.
TR
oboe: I guess that little strawman you just built and knocked over means you aren't going to be answering the question I asked you. OK.
oboe: I guess that little strawman you just built and knocked over means you aren't going to be answering the question I asked you. OK.
Oh, sorry. I thought you were engaging in dainty rhetorical hair-splitting and weren't expecting a literal response.
Oh, sorry. I thought you were engaging in dainty rhetorical hair-splitting and weren't expecting a literal response.
And I thought you weren't intellectually dishonest.
Live and learn, I guess.
GSR tests are notoriously unreliable:
^ ^ i don't think you understand the crux of my position. i never said GNR tests are 100% reliable, i said the absence of ANY evidence that a gun was fired raises doubt regarding the officer's version of events; the presence of gunpowder residue would be *some* evidence (although not conclusive) that a gun *may* have been fired by deonte and would back the officer's story.
if the theory is that deonte fired a handgun and the officer acted in self-defense, one would expect professional investigators to locate *some* proof that a handgun was fired, such as (1) a handgun (2) some proof that he fired a handgun (and even though gunpowder residue tests are not 100% reliable, they still are *some* form of evidence (although they can be challenged in court). if someone has SOME gunpowder residue on their person, it raises the INFERENCE that they may have fired a gun. absent such evidence, how does one establish a handgun was fired, pray tell, other than merely relying on the eyewitness testimony of parties in the vicinity...in this case, the eyewitnesses were implicated in the shooting (the officers) and they have an inherent bias...
this is not "moon landing theory", it is questioning the conclusions of a report based on thin evidence, said report remaining unreleased
i say all this to say, YOU have no additional information to add, which makes YOU sound like the wild theorist, not me...I am expressing doubt regarding conclusions where reasoning has not been offered other than (apparently) the eyewitness accounts of the parties accused of possible wrongdoing...
it is quite reasonable to suspect conclusions based on the eyewitness testimony of the accused...absent other evidence which you are clearly unable to provide
I especially find the comment "LOL @ thinking that helping the cops makes people safer" to be especially ignorant.
^ ^ if you read my subsequent qualifier explaining that my use of the term "people" referred specifically to "witnesses to a crime in DC" and still think so, I think you are the one who is especially ignorant to the rampant failure of DC to protect eyewitnesses from retaliation. maybe you should ask around the H Street area about the history of witness intimidation around here.
"Let me ask you soulsearcher, putting all the BS side arguments aside for the moment -- how else are we going to protect our communities if we don't help the police? Are the criminals going to protect us?"
^ ^ I'm saying that realistically in DC in 2009, the police CANT help you if you're a witness. They are outnumbered and outgunned by criminals who are determined to intimidate witnesses. If you're willing to take your life in your own hands, good luck, but indeed LOL @ anyone who thinks it is "safer" to talk to the police than it is *not* to, in our current environment. People willing to commit murder in broad daylight to silence witnesses are inherently dangerous to testify against. Do you disagree with this statement?
"The problem with your comment about helping the police is that it is just a variation on the "don't snitch" and "don't trust the police" attitude that pervades this city and just leads to more crime. "
^ ^ I *never* said "don't trust the police" and nothing I said is a variation of that. I said it's unsafe to testify against people willing to murder witnesses, because unfortunately this city does not have the resources to properly protect witnesses in cases where they are in mortal danger (note: there have been many witnesses who have successfully testified, so this is by no means a universal rule, but clearly it is safer to not cooperate at all in very specific cases where the perps are willing to kill witnesses...to say otherwise is to ignore the obvious).
Now, as for smaller crimes like witnessing car break-ins, burglaries, etc, by all means, dial 911 immediately, but if you witness a drug or other premeditated murder in DC and the murderers see *you* witness the murder in progress? cooperating in that narrow circumstance is HIGHLY dangerous in DC and most other cities, as well.
I think you seriously need to re-evaluate where you are coming from in all this and not get bogged down with these "the man is out to get you" conspiracy theories.
What I know is that a kid died in a very tragic manner. And it happened in my neighborhood. So yeah, you can bet any chance I get to help the police prevent crime in my neighorhood (whether its snitching or just watching my block and my neighbors houses) you're damn right I'm going to help the police do that.
Soulsearcher,
The more you post the more convoluted your points become.
First off, I did read your posts -- several times. You can back-track from or re-qualify your statements all you want but they still betray a general distrust of the police without any solid foundation or evidence.
For example, where is your evidence to support your contention that the "police can't help you if you're a witness"? In the case of this boy who was killed, he didn't even attempt to seek out police protection. But even putting that aside, where is evidence to support your general allegation that there has been "rampant failure" by DCPD to protect witnesses?
Indeed, your comment that "LOL @ anyone who thinks it is "safer" to talk to the police than it is *not* to" is clearly contracted by the most recent murder of this boy.
He did not talk to the police, did not seek the police's protection about the Halloween murder and the gangbangers shot him anyway!! How is that for "safer"?
Again, I think you need to seriously re-evaluate where you are coming from. Are you making a point based on facts or are you making a point based on opinions about the cops that are not supported by the facts? It seems to me the gist of all of your posts is to either a.) question the truthfulness of the police or b.) flat out undermine any reason to help the police without any evidence to support your contentions.
This is an irrational attitude that a lot of people have in this town and, to be frank, this is the kind of attitude that, taken in the aggregate, encourages crime in a community. Bottom line -- if you don't help the police when you see a crime, you are just asking for more crime. Period.
Again, it takes a village.
meh. the cops in dc are pretty much crap.
i've only lived here for twelve years, but i've had my experiences.
i remember one time when a cop was late to a crime scene (that i, amongst others, had called in), and he said that he had more important business to deal with in SE DC.... some woman who was threatening to kill her kid. apparently, they "talked her down" and then came to the three car accident.
anyway, you're deluding yourself if you think that DC cops are the answer to crime in this city.
they're not.
they're a useful aid in combating crime, but they're not the answer. if you truly believe that they are the answer, i want to hire you for a firm i know.... they'll be bankrupt in a few months, but you'll feel really good about yourself!
cops are tools... in all senses.
"First off, I did read your posts -- several times. You can back-track from or re-qualify your statements all you want but they still betray a general distrust of the police without any solid foundation or evidence."
For example, where is your evidence to support your contention that the "police can't help you if you're a witness"?
^ ^ what does that quote have to do with "general distrust of the police"? that has to do with the plain fact that there are more criminals than police officers, as one can tell by contrasting the number of police officers we have and the number of people convicted of committing crimes in DC (a fraction of the total criminal population, clearly, since crime continues while they are gone). the police can't be everywhere. i never said "the police don't *want* to protect witnesses". stop reading into what i write and pulling out the meaning you're looking for.
Turns out the 'innocent witness' George Rawlings had a 9mm and a bottle of PCP with him when he was killed, according to the Washington Post and the police report.
And apparently he was involved in the shooting of the guy he was attending the funeral for. Not a witness. A participant.
Maybe that had something to do with him not seeking police protection? Perhaps he was a bit more fond of his gun and PCP.
Sortof makes the Rawlings family attorney, what, a liar? So can we expect a clarification from him now?
Or is it still all the fault of the evil MPD?
Can you cite where you got that information?
Can you cite where you got that information?
See the updated thread re: Washington Post & City Paper...
Actually, the story doesn't say that he was involved in the killing. It says that the alleged killers of Rawlings thought he was -- correctly or incorrectly, we don't know --and suggests that retaliation was the motivation for his killing.
MPD doesn't seem to think he pulled the trigger, because they already had someone in custody for that.
Curmudgeon:
You are correct. So far there is no independent MPD verification that George Rawlings was involved in the original shooting.
But, really, folks, going to the funeral carrying a 9mm and PCP?
Then, of course, riding the public bus with the same?
Well if you're convinced that people are trying to kill you, I can see wanting to carry a pistol. A concern that was not unreasonable from what we've seen.
"Well if you're convinced that people are trying to kill you, I can see wanting to carry a pistol. A concern that was not unreasonable from what we've seen."
And I guess the PCP was for medicinal purposes only?
How about this instead?
How about seek police or DEA protection (of course, you'd have to ditch the PCP at least temporarily).
How about leave town?
Going to a public funeral where you know involved parties will be, then endangering actual innocent civilians on a public street and bus afterward, whilst toting a gun and drugs (particularly PCP, not exactly a benign drug), that ain't really the way to go.
Like it or not, this kid was a thug. He endangered the lives of innocent people, and he had a rap sheet longer than my internet-dating-site penis measurement.
Are you still arguing that 'the police look really bad right now'?
Hillman - Couldn't agree more! Your observations cut like a knife.
Post a Comment