The report even goes so far as to quote commenters from PoP and other blogs who said Shaw's was giving away booze at its soft openings. But particularly damning is the description of how someone on staff—Fathi claimed it was May—altered the Notice of Public Hearing to make it look like Shaw's had a liquor license so it could get local distributors to sell the restaurant alcohol:

Before submitting the Notices to the wholesalers, one of the Applicant's employees altered various parts of the document. […] Specifically, the document's heading posting date, petition date, hearing date, and the paragraph notifying the public that the Applicant had applied for a license were deleted using correction fluid. […] Based on the altered Notices, the two wholesalers sold alcoholic beverages to the Applicant.

It's one thing to dislike the liquor laws that exist. For example, The Atlantic's Megan McArdle wrote on the debacle, "All liquor licensing is useless; it mainly functions as either backdoor zoning control, or as a way for existing bar owners to protect themselves from competition."

But it's impossible to deny that the management of Shaw's screwed up badly. By not figuring out how to navigate the same laws that apply to liquor-serving restaurants all over the city, Fathi demonstrated pretty clearly that he wasn't prepared to uphold those laws.

Fortunately, the space is beautiful and in a pretty sweet location; so fear not, gentle Shaw residents! I find it hard to believe it will sit empty long once he decides to put it on the market. (We know of at least one restaurant operator who's interested in space in the neighborhood.)

Layla Lounge, located at 501 Morse Street NE, promises that it's the "newest, sexiest, hottest club in D.C." Before March 21, Leah Davis might have agreed. That's the day the 4'11" Davis says a 6'3" male bouncer zapped her an excruciating three times for no good reason.

Davis, a businesswoman, told her story of electroshock Wednesday, before the board of the Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration. Afterward, she told it again to City Desk.

Davis says she and her sister, Jacqualyn Davis, were casually making their way out of Layla Lounge that Sunday night when a bouncer grabbed her sibling's arm—roughly. "It didn't make any sense why he was touching my sister," Davis says. So she stepped in: "Don't touch her!"

The next thing Davis knew, she says, the bouncer fired some sort of shock device into her neck. She believes she got three jolts and that she retains nerve damage as a result. Davis was surprised by how things had escalated. "It didn't make any sense," she says.

Though Davis and court documents refer to the weapon used as a Taser, those devices generally fire small darts. Davis doesn't remember that happening, so she might have encountered a stun gun, instead. Stun guns and Tasers incapacitate their victims with an electric current and are banned in the District except to law enforcement.

Layla Lounge General Manager Lori P. Vasquez says that, as far as the lounge knows, no one from their security team had a Taser or anything like it that night.

The details of what allegedly transpired will be explored further. The board has recommended a second hearing, and Davis is suing. She's retained lawyer Jimmy Bell, who you may remember from another recent suit. She's asking for $1 million for the trauma.

In order to prevail, Bell says he's on the lookout for a key piece of evidence—his client remembers that a guy filmed the whole thing on his phone. "We hope he comes forward," says Bell.

Photo by centralasian via Flickr/Creative Commons Attribution License 2.0

One hearing this week about a liquor-license violation could have been routine. The Dupont Circle restaurant One Lounge, which often caters to a well-heeled international crowd, hired a D.J. on New Year's Eve. A surprise inspection by an Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration investigator that evening discovered that the DJ shouldn't have been there. The high-end 20th Street NW lounge needed an entertainment license to spin tunes.

At a Wednesday ABRA hearing, the restaurant said it was willing to take its lumps. The establishment had worked out a deal with city lawyers: One would pay a $2,500 fine and face a five-day license suspension for breaking the rules. Though the ABC board usually goes along with such compromises (which are similar to plea deals), this time, it didn't. That might be because the investigator involved in the incident claims he was offered a bribe and then intimidated.

In a report, investigator Craig Stewart says that after discovering the DJ at the lounge that December night, he wanted to confer with the restaurant's owner. The inspector eventually encountered co-owner Filipp Zeldin.  According to Stewart's account, when Zeldin found out what the trouble was about, he put his hand under the investigator's arm and "guided" him to the kitchen. A member of the lounge's security team followed with his hand on Stewart's shoulder. In the kitchen, Zeldin, who's originally from Saint Petersburg, Russia, began shooting the breeze with Stewart. "How could we take care of this?" Stewart says Zeldin asked him. The liquor cop told Zeldin he needed to contact ABRA to clear things up. Then, Stewart writes, Zeldin allegedly got close, putting his arm around Stewart's shoulder. "How could you and me take care of this?" Zeldin supposedly whispered.

After Stewart again insisted that Zeldin would have to clear things up through official channels, Zeldin got livid, Stewart says. "Who the fuck do you think you are?" Stewart recalls him yelling. When Stewart tried to exit, Zeldin's security guy blocked his way. Stewart wasn't sure they were going to let him leave, he told ABC board members at a January fact-finding hearing. So he called the cops on his cell.

One Lounge co-owner W. Seth McClelland says his business wasn't told why the board decided not to accept the deal. Asked whether he thinks it might be because of Stewart's story, he only says that "he can't fault the board for being protective of its investigators." ABRA hasn't responded to a request for comment.

"I'm really ashamed and sorry for what happened that night. I was so drunk I don't remember anything," Zeldin told the board at the January hearing. "And after this I realized that I have a problem with alcohol, so I went to AA meetings. I want to have the opportunity to apologize to Mr. Stewart from that night. I'm really sorry for what happened. I hope you can accept the apology."

But the board wasn't impressed by the mea culpa. As a matter of fact, then-board member Mital Gandhi went off on Zeldin: "I mean, I just still can't get my hands around this. Like, how do you think you can bribe one of our investigators, put your hands on him? Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? Do not put your hands on any of our investigators. Do you understand that?" Zeldin said he did.

McClelland suggests things have been blown out of proportion, and that Zeldin wasn't really applying mafia-style techniques that night. "His English wasn't perfect, and I think it was a misunderstanding at 3:30 in the morning," says McClelland. "We as a business have the utmost respect for ABRA and their inspectors."

The "misunderstanding" means the board will have another hearing on June 29, in which the specifics of the case will be fleshed out in what will resemble a criminal-court proceeding.

Photo by AMagill, Creative Commons Attribution License 2.0

Dominican eatery and bar Carolina Palace, on 14th Street NW, might say the same thing, if Metropolitan Police Department allegations can be believed. The nightlife spot, which sometimes blasts salsa and reggaeton from its dark interior, has had multiple incidents of violence, most recently a stabbing. Desire might be a factor.

At an Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration hearing today, MPD officer Eric Garcia-Burgos said the violence wasn't Carolina Palace's fault. "The problem isn't the place itself, it's basically the patrons," said the officer, who sped to the eatery after an April 9 stabbing that occurred around 3:15 a.m. The bloody altercation came after a fight started inside the establishment and migrated outside. The incident prompted ABRA to schedule a fact-finding hearing. When Garcia-Burgos interviewed the victim's friends, they said it all started over a woman. That didn't surprise the cop in the least. "Whatever incident happens [at Carolina Palace]," said Garcia-Burgos, "nine times out of ten it has to do with females."

(Of course, if that's the case, Feminism 101 teaches us that at the core of that awful dynamic is women being treated as objects.)

Owner Esteban Ramirez says there's something besides sexism at work, though. He told the board the area around his restaurant gets crowded because there are four other establishments nearby, and the crowding causes chaos as patrons head home. Of course, that couldn't have contributed to the stabbing he was there to talk about, since the conflict happened inside. But Garcia-Burgos said the area sometimes lacks patrols, because it happens to be on the border of his police district, the 4th, and its neighbor, the 3rd. The 4th has no problem covering its territory, but the area is "real busy" for the 3rd, "so unfortunately they can't always have people out there."

Whatever is to blame, the business won't be punished. The board declined to take further action.

Photo by stevendepolo via Flickr/Creative Commons Attribution License 2.0

At an Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration hearing today, an investigator said a Dupont Circle nightclub served alcohol to minors, and that one underage George Washington University student who was served ended up semi-conscious, getting raped.

According to an investigative report prepared by ABRA agents, on the night of Oct. 2, the 18-year-old was allowed to enter Spot Lounge, where she consumed alcoholic beverages. Witnesses told that afterwards, just outside the high-end lounge, which is located at 1224 18th St. NW, the student was barely conscious when her alleged assaulter, also a G.W. student, "announced to the crowd that he had just had sex with a girl."

One witness questioned "the validity" of the announcement and went over to the announcer's nearby Mercedes Benz—to find the barely conscious victim in the back seat with her underwear around her ankles.

The document says the alleged assailant—who was over 21 and had purchased a private table where eight bottles of alcohol were served—later stated to the witness that "I had sex with her but it was consensual. Don't tell anyone." The victim reported her story to police. MPD said an arrest was likely, according to the ABRA investigative report. Since names weren't included in the document, City Desk isn't sure yet if there was actually an arrest made.

ABRA believes at least two other underage G.W. females were allowed into the club on the same night, and that one was hospitalized after drinking too much. A call to  G.W. hasn't been returned yet.

The board decided to schedule a "show cause" hearing (similar to a court hearing), a more involved version of the "fact-finding" hearing held today, to find out more about the allegations. "We don't have enough information," said Charles Brodsky, the board's chair. "We just don't."

Lawyer Ely Hurwitz, who sat next to Spot owner Osmar Nunez-Vilches during the hearing, suggested reports of the incident were confused, and that no employees recalled seeing the underage students at Spot. Talking with City Desk later, Hurwitz says the investigation was botched: "We don't believe they were in our restaurant. There's no evidence that that they were."

Hurwitz says there were inconsistencies in ABRA's investigative report. An initial police report about the student who was hospitalized, for instance, referred to the address of Spot's  neighbor, Public Bar.

The biggest piece of confusion was that a campus police report taken in reference to the sexual assault referred to the underage drinking as having taken place at the "P-Spot nightclub" located at "210 Rhode Island Avenue."  A campus administrator later corrected the account, saying it had occurred at Spot. "In fact, the evidence said that they were at P Spot," says Hurwitz.

The theory that the students were drinking at P Spot has a couple of flaws, however. First, the P Spot is an exercise establishment that teaches cardio-striptease.

Owner Michaela Brown says the closest her members come to partying is renting out the studio for group classes, and that she doesn't have a liquor license. The other problem? Brown moved her studio to 10th Street NE on Capitol Hill on Oct. 1. She had the grand opening  for her new location a full day before the underage drinking reportedly took place.

Hurwitz isn't convinced of the studio's innocence. "It's like a club, they do bachelorette parties there," Hurwitz says about the exercise place. The P Spot website does refer to some of its group classes as "parties," but also says that alcohol consumption is "strictly prohibited."

Even if that isn't the case, Hurwitz says,"why did the police report make such a big mistake?"

The alleged assault couldn't possibly have happened right out front of the club, as ABRA indicated, Hurwitz says: "There's like twenty police officers out there. You think she's going to be sexually molested out there?" On the night in question, Nunez-Vilches says, there were  four police officers and two security officers hired to patrol the outside of the club.

But that doesn't necessarily mean those cops would rush to check out what was happening between two people in a car on a Saturday night.

The show cause hearing hasn't been scheduled yet.

Photo by Darrow Montgomery

Vince Gray

A town hall hosted by the D.C. Patients' Cooperative last night was scheduled a month ago; the advocates that organized it had hoped that by the time the town hall occurred, the mayor would have signed off on regulations approved by the City Council in November 2010. Alas, no such action has happened, and the process to implement cannabis growth and distribution in the District is at an impasse until Gray gets around to acknowledging it.

D.C. Patients' Cooperative, a non-profit advocacy group, hopes to apply to run a dispensary. But, given the lack of approved legal infrastructure, last night's four-person panel couldn't give much beyond speculation of how some things, like access to cannabis for low-income patients, would actually function. Without the implementation of the regulations—and, thus, the implementation of a board to oversee the implementation of the regulations—advocates' hands are tied.

The Department of Health's Deputy Director, who drafted the medical marijuana statute, said "The next step is for each of the agencies that the mayor had delegated to implement the program to begin implementing the program. The Department of Health is doing their part, and the big bottleneck in the system is the mayor to appoint the panel that will accept applications for dispensaries and cultivation centers. It's out of the council's hands for now, which is what I represent, and it's really on the mayor to make the necessary appointments so the program can be implemented." ABRA director Fred Moosally and chairman Charles Brodsky were also in attendance.

Nonetheless, the group, which included D.C. Patients' Cooperative board members Nikolas Schiller and Adam Eidinger (who uses medical marijuana for his chronic arthritis) and Tony Bowles of the D.C. chapter of Americans for Safe Access, ably answered questions about what prospective patients, distributors, and growers might be able to expect if the regulations are approved.

A few highlights:

• Patients will only be allowed to obtain their cannabis from one dispensary, which will be noted on their prescription card. This way, no one can double-dip and pick up the allowed 2 ounces at more than one dispensary.
• "Cannabanoid profiles" break down what's in each strain of marijuana; notably, THC, the psychoactive agent that affects the brain, and CBD, which affects the rest of the body. Patients will, unquestionably, know more about what's in their marijuana than those that partake in the substance recreationally.
• Medical marijuana in D.C. will likely be some of the most expensive in the country. Cannabis will need to be grown here, not imported, and rents are high. Home cultivation, which might reduce some of the expense, is expressly not allowed.
• Patients do not need a clean record for a recommendation for medical marijuana; the recommendation is given by a doctor. Caregivers are allowed for patients who are not able to pick up their cannabis, but caregivers do need a record clear of drug convictions and felonies. Likewise, to work at a cultivation or dispensary, a record clear of drug convictions and felonies is required. (Yes, this means that you can have a history of violent crime or fraud and work at a dispensary or cultivation center.)
• DCist notes that "If and when the program gets off of the ground, a big problem yet to be resolved is where cultivators will get their seeds. Getting them from out-of-state would be illegal, after all, so what are the options? The Metropolitan Police Department, ventured one advocate. Seeds from seized plants could be used, he argued."

One audience member asked if what was being discussed could actually be happening if the mayor had signed the regulations last month, as advocates had hoped. "Yes," said Schiller.

At the point, there's nothing for the advocates—and prospective patients—to do but wait, though there is little indication as to when Gray will get things rolling. Moosally indicated that the executive approval might come in the next few weeks.

Photo by Flickr user Mike_fj40 using an Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic Creative Commons license

As Alcoholic Beverage Control Board members probed the incident on Wednesday, one of the things that became clear was that a badge might have gotten a guy backstage at the strip joint. An inebriated man accompanying one of the dancers involved in the fight might have been posing as a cop. "We got some police that come through," Skylark floor-manager Tyrone Rogers said when questioned by the board. Rogers, a tall man with a football player's shoulders, hunched forward as the board pushed him for details. Rogers explained that cops sometimes come into the club to check on things. That's why the man was allowed in the back area of the Skylark, along with one of its off-duty dancers (a pretty, voluminously-haired stripper known as Ice). When the bartender tried to stop the man from going into the back with Ice, he flashed a badge.

While the man didn't make things difficult by participating in the fight that erupted, afterward, he insisted Skylark not call 911, according to Rogers. He was a cop, he said. He would handle it. Someone called anyway. Later, the real cops discovered that the man was actually a bail bondsman. Board members seemed worried about the fact that the bondsman so easily gained access to the off-limits portion of Skylark. Apparently, you can buy a bail bonds agent badge for about 30 bucks.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the board recommended the Office of Attorney General schedule a show-cause hearing, which means Skylark could end up facing penalties for the row. Stephen O'Brien, Skylark's attorney, was on hand for the hearing and spoke with City Desk. "We believe that Skylark acted appropriately in response to an unfortunate incident," he says.

Dancing Crab, the D.C. landmark whose website says it serves the "finest Hard Shell crabs from Maryland and Louisiana," has been accused of serving something else: Minors.

On Wednesday, the District's Alcoholic Beverage Control Board held a hearing regarding two investigative reports about the eatery, located at 4615 Wisconsin Ave. NW, submitted by liquor cops. The reports accuse the establishment of selling booze to three underaged customers. The three were students from nearby American University. The restaurant attracts attendees of the school—an entry on the AU website says the "establishment offers inexpensive seafood." But the board seemed convinced the place had been offering more than that, so it socked the business with a $6,000 fine and a 23-day liquor license suspension. Though the business can probably afford the fine, 23 days without the ability to serve alcohol will definitely hurt its bottom line.

Reached by phone, Dancing Crab manager Chris Leach says the "heavy fine" and the suspension are a "nightmare," and that "all reasonable efforts were taken to to keep alcohol out of the hands of the underaged." "You do your best to look at the I.D.," she says. But a tick later, Leach admits the Dancing Crab's nighttime business leans heavily on AU students, and that business has slacked off ever since authorities began descending on the place to check identifications and make arrests. "Word has gotten around," she says.

The raids that led to the fines began last spring. On March 28, investigators from ABRA and MPD entered the Dancing Crab and "observed two females who appeared very young in age sitting at a table consuming what appeared to be alcoholic beverages," say documents. "Upon checking the identification of the females Detective [Dave] Carter determined both patrons were under 21 years of age and were consuming Vodka and tonic drinks." Investigators discovered the two AU students had used fake IDs to get in. The pictures on the IDs weren't of the students.

In a May 1 incident, in which an underaged female student was caught drinking a beer in the establishment, things went similarly, according to documents—except that when investigators arrived at the Dancing Crab to check on things, an employee of the place appeared to try to warn the underaged customer by whispering in her ear.

AU spokesperson Rob Hradsky e-mails that "there have been several incidents in the past in which underage students have been served alcohol at the Dancing Crab." He adds that "ABRA has been a strong partner with the university in working with neighborhood establishments to curb underage drinking."

Photo by T o n y via Flickr/Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic

At an Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration hearing, the club also learned that it would no longer need to pay for a police detail to monitor the bar whenever it's open. That means ABRA has dropped two requirements it originally placed on DC9 when it allowed the bar to open up again: The board had ordered the club to agree not to allow the employees to return, and to maintain a detail.

Before the decision came down, city lawyer Louise Phillips recommended that DC9 be permitted to to rehire the employees once accused of murder, and that the police detail requirement be completely removed. This all but assured things would go the club's way. The move drew the anger of a friend of Mohammed, Aman Deka, 29: "That's not right," he said, as he walked from the hearing room.

DC9 will need to pay to have D.C. cops present from 11 p.m. until an hour after closing on weekdays, and 12 a.m. to an hour after closing on weekends. There could be more changes coming soon, too: The ABC Board has scheduled a Feb. 16 show-cause hearing regarding the conduct of DC9 on the night of Mohammed's death.

On Oct. 15, Mohammed, 27, threw at least one brick through a DC9 widow and was chased by club employees. Later, he would be pronounced dead at Howard University Hospital. A few weeks after Metropolitan Police Department officials declared the DC9 employees guilty of vigilanteism, charges against the men who pursued Mohammed were dropped.

At an ABRA hearing Wednesday, lawyer Andrew Kline argued that the club should be allowed to reopen for several reasons. The club had retrained its staff, installed security cameras, and revamped its security plan. But the most critical point Kline raised was that the five club employees who'd been accused of aggravated assault were no longer facing charges in connection with the death of Ali Ahmed Mohammed: "This establishment we believe has done everything that could be reasonably expected of an operator."

DC9 has been facing a 30-day suspension of its liquor license because of the Oct. 15 incident outside the club that preceeded Mohammed's death. Originally, cops asserted that he'd been beaten to death by the five employees because he threw a brick through their establishment's window. Since then, all charges against the men have been dropped for a lack of evidence.

The club hoped to reopen before the end of its suspension, in light of the derailment of the criminal complaint. Trying to convince the board, Kline made the argument that when the five men chased after Mohammed, they were within their rights, an argument he's made before. "There was a lawful citizen's arrest," said Kline. But arguing on behalf of the city, attorney Louise Phillips pointed out that the men were still being investigated, and that the board should wait for the much-anticipated autopsy report of Mohammed before allowing the business to open its doors again.

One of the sticking points for board members was that it wasn't really clear whether the men involved in the October incident would be working at a reopened DC9. When asked whether they would, Kline hedged: "Right now, no one is working there, the place is closed." He later said they would not work there in the "foreseeable future."

The board wasn't in the mood for ambiguity. "How do you treat a licensee who chases someone down and puts their hands on them?" board chair Charles Brodsky would later growl.

Outside, when the news that DC9 would not be allowed to reopen reached a crowd protesting the idea of letting the place off the hook, they cheered. But Roger Gordon, who has been acting as a media adviser to Mohammed's family, told the crowd the hearing was somewhat of a hollow victory, as it didn't shut DC9 down permanently. "This is not justice—this is dicking us around," he told them.

The board will reconvene on Dec. 1 to decide what to do next. They'll be navigating some tough issues.

In closing arguments, lawyer Andrew Kline said that's what happened in the vicinity of DC9 on October 15, when Ali Ahmed Mohammed wound up dead. When DC9 co-owner Bill Spieler and employees Darryl Carter, Reginald Phillips, Evan Preller, and Arthur Zaloga chased Mohammed down the street, after a perhaps inebriated—and definitely angry—Mohammed hurled two bricks through one of the establishment's windows (Mohammed wanted to be let into the club), Kline said, they were within their rights. "They were effectuating a citizen's arrest."

That argument seemed not to win over the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) board. The board decided DC9 was an "imminent danger" and that the summary suspension of the venue's liquor license would continue for the next 30 days. The board will convene a status hearing at the end of that period in order to decide what to do next.

The hearing that led up to that decision began with Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration (ABRA) investigator Erin Mathieson, the only witness called by city lawyer Louise Phillips. Mathieson cleaved closely to an investigative report she earlier submitted to the board. Mathieson interviewed MPD investigators following the death of Mohammed. They told her witnesses saw the suspects chase down Mohammed and beat him.  But there was one important difference in the way Mathieson presented her findings from the stand. The report told that Zaloga had reached Mohammed first and tackled him, while police charging documents placed Preller in that role. Mathieson demurred to cops and corrected her earlier statement in her testimony.

Next  on the stand was Joe Englert. Attempting to keep his license, Englert testified that those accused of pummeling Mohammed to death were "gentle people." He called the events leading up to Mohammed's death "extraordinary," and though the co-owner wasn't there on the night in question, he argued that the men had only detained Mohammed. Despite believing the DC9 men are innocent, Englert promised that, if his place were ever allowed to open again, there would be improvements. Surveillance cameras have already been installed in the club, and he's planning to retrain his staff. Then Englert mentioned something that seems like bad news for anyone hoping to see the club open again. He would be helping to pay for the training, as "at this point, there's no money left at DC9."

At one point, ABC board member Mital Gandhi let Englert know he wasn't impressed: "I'm not satisfied right now." Gandhi later added, "There's been a death here. This isn't someone getting a black eye."

The next witness wasn't actually there. A seven-minute interview by Channel 7  with DC9 bartender Damon Dixon was played, because Dixon was unavailable,  as he's testifying in front of the grand jury today in connection to the DC9 criminal case. In the video, Dixon contended he'd seen the chase and capture of Mohammed and that the five men didn't try to hurt him: "One was just kind of pressing him down and the other was restraining his hand."

Other witnesses for the defense mostly spoke to Englert's credibility as a club owner and what would happen at DC9 going forward. There was also an important audio recording played.

The argument that the men facing aggravated assault charges in the wake of Mohammed's death were making a citizen's arrest will probably show up in the criminal trial. According to D.C. code, a citizen's arrest is legal. If that proves to get the accused off, those seeking justice for Mohammed will likely see the law as a loophole through which Mohammed's attackers escaped proper punishment.

TBD points out that this reporter missed something interesting. The police charging documents and ABRA's report don't completely coincide. The police name Preller as the DC9 employee who tackled Mohammed, while liquor cops name Zaloga. The mix up could amount to a clerical error, but it could also be a sign of a flawed investigation.

Original post: An investigative report released by the Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration (ABRA) seems to back up police accounts that Ali Ahmed Mohammed was chased, and then caught, by five men working at nightclub DC9 before he died early last Friday morning. But exactly what caused his death is still up in the air.

Cops suggested through charging documents that Mohammed was beaten to death by owner Bill Spieler and employees Darryl Carter, Reginald Phillips, Evan Preller, and Arthur Zaloga after he threw a brick through DC9's window.

Supporters of the men have rallied around them, and expressed disbelief that club workers would harm the 27-year-old Ethiopian. At a vigil for Mohammed last night outside DC9, however, where a throng of mourners gathered and the crowd chanted that they wanted justice, Talib I. Karim, chairman of the District's Muslim Democratic Caucus, said Mohammed had been brutally murdered by the men.

ABRA, which is conducting its own investigation into the incident because it oversees and issues liquor licenses to establishments like DC9, seemed to stop short of calling what happened murder.

The report says that ABRA Investigator Erin Mathieson was able to establish that an October 15 altercation took place that involved "a male patron, an owner of DC9, and four security members." Though Mathieson goes on to repeat the story that the five DC9 men chased and beat Mohammed after he hurled a brick, she doesn't say that the beating killed him. "Investigator Matheison was able to determine that one of the owners, Bill Spieler, and four staff members then chased the man up the road where he was subsequently tackled and beaten until he was in an unresponsive state."

As part of her investigation, Mathieson interviewed Captain Michael Farish of the Metropolitan Police Department's homicide branch, who is  involved in the police investigation of Mohammed's death. Farish told Matheison that things had gone bad after Mohammed attempted to enter the club:

Captain Farish stated that there were two issues there, the establishment was closed for the night and the decdent appeared to be drunk. Captain Farish stated that the decedent then left the area for a short period of time, and then returned with a brick and threw it through the front window of the establishment. According to Captain Farish, the owner, Bill Spieler, took off out of the establishment first, chasing after the decedent. Captain Farish said that the main security person involved, Arthur Zaloga, exited the establishment second and eventually passed Mr. Spieler and reached the decedent first. Captain Farish stated that it was Mr. Zaloga that tackled the decedent to the ground, and then he, Mr. Spieler, and three other employees of DC9 proceeded to kick and punch the decedent while he was on the ground.  Captain Farish stated that there were witnesses who saw Mr. Spieler and Mr. Zaloga run out of the establishment and chase the decedent, and additional witnesses who saw the employees kicking and punching the decedent. Captain Farish stated that the decedent had a contusion and abrasion on the forehead, a laceration to the upper and lower lip, and significant bruising on the forearms. Captain Farish further stated that at this time, the D.C.  Medical Examiner's office could not say definitely that the external wounds suffered in the beating were the cause of death.

Mathieson also interviewed the first cop on the scene, Officer Brian Morgan. The officer said "he was flagged down by a man, whom he later identified as Bill Spieler, owner of DC9." According to the document, Spieler told Morgan "that he had apprehended the suspect who broke his front window and stated that he was around the corner." The cop said he followed Spieler to the spot where Mohammed was lying on the ground with the four DC9 employees standing around him. Morgan said that "one employee stated the decedent was moving just before the officer arrived."

As more details emerge, the  culture clash that seems to be happening in the wake of the incident is likely to intensify. Though a coming autopsy report could clear up a lot about what happened the night Mohammed died, it might not do much to resolve the tensions that emerged afterward. One man, speaking at the vigil Tuesday night, yelled that "America was built on the backbones of immigrants."

Later on, as the mostly East African vigil participants milled around, the mostly white patrons at Nellie's Sports Bar on the corner seemed not to notice the grievers, and no one from the vigil seemed to want to wander into Nellie's for a drink.

Shortly after his appearance before the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board on Wednesday, despite having a somewhat slight build, Kamal "Commie" Jahanbein stubbornly rolls heavy metal kegs of German lager through a door that leads into his darkened establishment.

Moments ago, with the same stubbornness, he had told the board he wasn't interested in paying a $1,000 fine to the city just because he hadn't sold enough food items, like The Saloon's fried clam strips or urbock chili ("for an unusual experience," the menu says).

Jahanbein insists his business is a pub, and that pubs occupy a special place in the nightlife scene, as they're not quite eateries and not quite bars. But he also let them know that in the near future, his U Street business will technically be a tavern.

Looking sufficiently proletariat in a plaid shirt and brown corduroys, Jahanbein takes a break from unloading the lager to suck on a cigarette and explain the situation: "I've put in an application to change my license," he says. The owner hopes changing his liquor license from restaurant-class to tavern-class will get the ABC Board to leave him alone. The Saloon has been unable to meet a requirement that says spots designated as restaurants have to do at least 45 percent of their business in food sales.

The new license will cost $700 more a year to maintain. Jahanbein is willing to pay the extra cash. After he gets it, The Saloon won't change, he promises. Jahanbein has no intention of making the green-painted hangout with its stained glass light fixtures and exposed brick anything like a dark scummy bar. "I have a perfect, peaceful ambiance," he says. So things like the pub's no TV rule, for instance, will stand. Hopefully, such guarantees will keep local NIMBYs from protesting the conversion.

As for the $1,000 city lawyers want him to pay, he's not resisting because he's a tightwad. Jahanbein says he "has a mental problem" with giving the money to the city because of a sometimes-enforced regulation ("We've been here for 20 years," he says. "Where was the law 20 years ago?"). Instead of paying the fine, he says, he could use it house a family of five.

Jahanbein doesn't like to talk about it, and he doesn't really want City Desk to write about it, but he uses his business to fund a foundation that's built houses and clinics around the world. (As the signed bricks around the bar, and its annual summer breaks for Jahanbein to go work, attest.)

Besides, paying up to the District when he says he hasn't done anything wrong is against his philosophy. "If you work hard and you are good, there is no reason to take shit from anybody," he fumes.

Photo by Darrow Montgomery

The sale of Love Nightclub won't be going through quite as quickly as the people involved in the transaction were hoping.

Love, on Okie Street NE off New York Avenue, shuttered for three months earlier this year after a non-fatal stabbing inside the club on New Year’s Day. Since reopening, the club has only catered special events. Owner Marc Barnes filed bankruptcy for his club earlier this month. The plan had been to sell to Dean Smothers, owner of The Scene, on Adams Place NE.

But the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board refused to allow transfer of the liquor license involved after a hearing on Wednesday.

“Clearly when you acquire arguably the largest nightclub in D.C., that has a history [of] having large events, lots of people, lots of activity, clearly it’s interesting to us who’s going to move in,” said ABC Board Chairman Charles Brodsky at the hearing.

Smothers plans to acquire the 3,500-capacity venue for $7.3 million–encompassing the property, the trade name, Love, and all assets within the property.

A firefighter by day, Smothers does not run The Scene's day-to-day operations. The venue already has a history of at least four appearances before the ABC Board since it’s opening a year and a half ago, said board member Mital Gandhi, who worried about the management of Love. (And who will not be moving on from the ABC Board to the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics.)

Although Smothers has hired Mohmmad Jahan, who’s run various properties for Jay-Z’s 40/40 Club, as the general manager and two assistant managers, to handle Love’s day-to-day activities, alongside 60 security personnel, Gandhi expressed concern.

“I’m trying to figure out [how] you, with the full-time job and a lot going on, how you’re going to be able to run not only The Scene, but also the largest night club in the District,” he said. “And I’m still not comfortable with that, especially given the track record you have with The Scene.”

On questioning, Smothers was asked how Love would differ from The Scene, a live entertainment venue. He said the venue will host patrons 21 and up, adding there'll be live entertainment, but no drum sets or guitars.

“If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, than it’s a duck...whether he doesn’t have a bongo or a banjo, I personally don’t give a crap,” Brodsky responded.

After a 10-minute recuse with attorney Makan Shirafkan, Smothers clarified, live entertainment of all sorts will happen, but there won’t be any go-go to avoid certain crowds. (Presumably, crowds of young black go-go listeners, who the ABC Board and the Metropolitan Police Department believe attract trouble.)

Brodsky admonished, “We appreciate your representations that you will not produce go-go music in your night club, [but] I think you’re foolish to do that. Go-go brings in money, and it brings in people, and it’s the epicenter of…Washington, D.C.”

The ABC Board also announced they’d received a letter from the Office of Tax and Revenue opposing the sale to Smothers. The letter read, “Based on the research of our tax records, The Scene is not in compliance with the tax laws of the District. As such, we’d currently object with the transfer.”

“[I] didn’t know we had those issues until we got the letter today,” Smothers who'd also just received a copy that morning said. “That issue will be resolved today.”

Smothers didn’t help his case when he noted recently hiring a new accountant, and then couldn’t recall whether the new accountant was hired six months ago or two weeks ago. He also said the tax issues probably had to do with $4,000 worth of tax delinquencies from when The Scene first opened—but he couldn't be sure.

Once Smothers paid his owed taxes and provides the board with a slew of other documents, the ABC Board says they'll take a second look.

Photo by enviziondotnet. Creative Commons Attribution License.

After months of ruckus, neighbors aiming to block the Stadium Club’s liquor license renewal sure made a lousy case at Wednesday’s Alcoholic Beverage Control Board (ABC) hearing.

In June, residents in the Ward 5 neighborhoods abutting the club-cum-steakhouse submitted two petitions, one with five signatures and another with 21, arguing the establishment was disrupting peace, quiet and public safety. The club had previously been located at 900 First Street SE, but moved when the city declared eminent domain to make room for the new ballpark. It opened at its new digs on Queens Chapel Road in April.

But when the club's license renewal application came up this week, only one resident showed up to declare it unwelcome: Lauren Wallace, a U.D.C. law student and local who'd signed the five-signature petition. The second, 21-neighbor group had apparently dropped out. “This case is not about nude dancing being a bad thing in D.C., [but] whether or not it’s appropriate for a nude dancing establishment to be in a residential neighborhood,” Wallace said.

Stadium Club co-manager Keith Forney testified on the club's behalf, accompanied by lawyer Stephen O'Brien and an entourage of witnesses. The club noted that it occupies two lots alongside warehouses for a meat company and a waste-management firm, well away from delicate neighbors.

Wallace, on the other hand, had just one witness, D.C. resident and fellow U.D.C. law student Benjamin Petok, who was at the club on the evening of June 16^th, when a homeless man slashed a valet attendant with a broken bottle. As a result, Petok was unable to exit the premises around midnight. MPD apprehended the man, who was not a patron. Mayhem!

How common are such incidents? An Alcoholic Beverage Regulatory Administration (ABRA) investigator, Jabriel Shakoor, followed hearing custom to detail recent calls to police about the venue. Since May, the calls have included reports of: a simple assault, an assault with a deadly weapon, disorderly conduct, and a theft. Shakoor said that over the course of several visits, he also witnessed couples, friends and larger parties eating at the restaurant portion of the establishment.

Unfortunately for club foes, he did not cite any liquor-law violations.

Alas, once Wallace took over cross-examination, the line of questioning lost direction.

“Is it true that vaginas are shown?” she asked.

“They are nude, in that vaginas can be seen…,” Forney replied.

Things got worse for the protestants. Petok, who’d never been in the neighborhood before his trip to the club, revealed that he was asked to visit by a fellow student, Don Padou, who reimbursed him $325 for the night, covering admission and drinks. Padou, a Ward 5 resident, was another member of Wallace's group of five petitioners. He was not present at the hearing.

On the stand, Petok described his night at the strip joint: dancers working on two stages, clothed at first but eventually–wait for it–stripping nude. He said he bought a few dancers drinks and witnessed customers consume alcohol on the outdoors patio. Both of which are against club policy.

Petok also claimed to have seen things that almost violated city strip-club regs against touching and lap dances.

“I suppose you could avoid touching the dancers, but I think there’s incidental contact,” he said, noting patrons tipped dancers on stage. “Some women would touch their breasts, genital and buttocks.”

And near the end of the night–five hours in–Petok paid $100 for 10-minutes in a private room with a dancer–his car was blocked, what else was he to do? The experience was “essentially a lap dance, where she, naked, would grind her exposed body up against my clothed body,” he said.

Such testimony might have been damning–notwithstanding the use of mitigating words like "incidental" and "essentially"–but for one pesky problem: Liquor license hearings aren't the place to hash out strip-club rules.

After about 90 minutes, ABC Board Chairman Charles Brodsky ran out of patience when Wallace refused to let her witness answer club attorney O'Brien's question: "How did what you observed in the Stadium Club that night, impact peace, order, and quiet outside of the club?"

Petok, Wallace said, was there only to state facts and not his own opinions.

“The basis of this protest is peace, order, and quiet…the only witness put on by the protestant group…is a guy that can’t make any claims to peace, order, and quiet,” Brodsky replied. “So, why in God’s name did they bring you? I don’t understand.”

If the club is violating its own stripper-behavior, and the city's, residents can't trust them to maintain order outside their establishment, Wallace explained.

“I’m not really interested in your theoretical reasoning…claims by a paid person…that goes inside this establishment to find something that goes on inside, that has no impact on the outside,” Brodsky said.

At this point, Petok piped up. He was merely visiting the strip club as a favor for a friend, he said.

“You were paid,” Brodsky shot back.

“It was a zero sum for me,” Petok replied.

“That’s like being a little bit pregnant,” Brodsky said.

On the other hand, the law student did say one good thing about his visit: “I certainly didn’t observe prostitution.”

The ABC Board did not immediately vote on the club. A decision is due soon.

For more Stadium Club content, check out the review by City Paper's own Tim Carman of the club's walled-off, no-cover-charge restaurant section. For the record, vaginas could be seen there, too, but not very easily. The review focused instead on chef Andre Miller's wallet-emptying steak.

Photo by Darrow Montgomery.