Durval Martins (right), with twin brother Pedro.

Durval Martins, a 35-year-old gay man, was murdered in Logan Circle last December. Martins was found, dead in the intersection, with his wallet in his hand. He had been shot multiple times in the head. He had not been robbed. No arrests have been made in Martins' case.

On Tuesday May 19, Gays and Lesbians Opposed to Violence co-chairs Chris Farris and Todd Metrokin will hold a vigil to raise awareness about potential hate crimes in Washington, D.C., and to "renew focus" on Martins' murder. Farris and Metrokin submitted the following companion piece detailing the progression of Martins' case.

On a cold and drizzly night this past December, Durval Martins, a 35-year-old gay man and one of nine children, said good-bye to his friends on 17th Street and started his walk home. He never made it. He was shot to death at the intersection of 11th and Q.

Here is what we know about Durval’s murder:

* He was shot multiple times in the head

* He was shot while still in the intersection—just before stepping up onto the sidewalk

* He still had his wallet in his hand—nothing was stolen from him

* Two men were seen by police running from the scene of the shooting

* No arrests have been made, despite laudable efforts by the Metropolitan Police Department and community members to draw attention to the case

At this point in the investigation, we can’t be sure that Durval’s murder was related to his sexual orientation, but we do know for certain that he was not a victim of a robbery and that no other credible motive has been put forth. We also know it occurred against a backdrop of unsettling statistics on hate crimes based on sexual orientation in DC: hate crimes based on sexual orientation increased from a reported 26 in 2007 to 32 in 2008. In 2007, the percentage of hate crimes based on sexual orientation was 68 percent of all hate crimes reported in DC—in 2008, that percentage increased to 74 percent. This compares to a national average of 15 percent.

In addition, Durval’s murder occurred just 7 blocks from the murder of Tony Hunter, who was beaten to death as he walked to BeBar with a friend two months before Durval’s murder.

A crime in our community strikes fear in all of us because it could happen to any of us, any of our friends, any of our family members. An attack against someone because they are a part of our cmmunity is a crime against all of us because it is meant to intimidate us. If Durval was targeted because he was gay, then any person perceived to be gay could have been attacked, or may be targeted next. If they so violently executed him because he was gay, then their motive was clear: to terrorize all gay people in the neighborhood and send a message that we are not welcome here, and we are not safe.

We need to take a stand. We need to raise awareness and help the police solve this case—failure to do so keeps every one of us at risk. The killers who targeted Durval are, after all, still out there. And they very well may feel that they are beyond capture—that they have literally gotten away with this murder.

GLOV, DC’s GLBT Anti-Violence Task Force, is organizing a vigil and march to raise awareness of hate crimes against the GLBT community and to renew focus on Durval’s murder so the police can get new leads and solve this case. Durval’s identical twin brother, Pedro, will be there to join us. We ask that you come, too—bring friends, neighbors, colleagues, and families—and please wear white to show your support. Take a stand and send a message back to the killers that says that they are the ones who are not welcome in our neighborhoods. And we will be safe in our city.

January 16, 2009 — Mayor Fenty and Police Chief Lanier met with Chris Farris and Todd Metrokin, Co-Chairs of GLOV (Gays and Lesbians Opposing Violence), along with Sgt. Brett Parson to discuss solutions to the problem of anti-GLBT violence in DC. Several points from the list of recommendations made to Mayor Fenty and Chief Lanier (see below) recieved immediate commitments.

The most notable commitment was the Mayor's agreement to comply with existing DC law requiring him to submit an annual hate crimes report to the the City Council Equally important, the Mayor agreed that measurable goals should be set to reduce ant-GLBT harassment in the DCPublic School system and to revisit previous proposals by SMYAL (the Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League) on the subject. Both Mayor Fenty and Chief Lanier agreed to facilitate a meeting between GLOV and the new U.S. Attorney for DC, once that person is appointed, to discuss grievances regarding case management and policies.

"Mayor Fenty opened the meeting with a request for actionable suggestions on how the DC government could address the issue," said Farris, "but would not commit to making a public statement acknowledging and condemning the violence, although we pressed hard for that. To his credit, however, he invited us to continue to send concrete requests his adminstration can act on to him directly. Working with the police, prosecutors, the GLBT community, the schools, and our allies, most notably those who serve on DC's Anti-Bias Task Force, GLOV intends to act on the Mayor's invitation."

Chief Lanier was very receptive to GLOV's recommendations for her Department, offering to share the current mandatory online hate crimes training curriculum as well as sharing her innovative plan to expand the GLLU program by maintaining the central GLUU office but allowing gay and lesbian officers to serve as liasons within their own precincts, thus increasing the potential number of officers recognized under the GLLU while integrated throughout the MPD.

"I feel that Chief Lanier understands the issue and is truly interested in improving the performance of the MPD." said Metrokin. "And we assured both her and the Mayor that we are also doing our part
by re-educating our community on safety issues and encouraging reporting."

"The Chief has demonstrated in the past that she is a partner in our efforts to reduce anti-GLBT hate crimes, and today she re-confirmed that partnership," said Farris. "We are hopeful that today's meeting
with the Mayor is the beginning of an equally productive partnership."

—

GLOV offered Mayor Fenty the following recommendations to address anti-GLBT crime:

I. a strong public statement that recognizes the issue of anti-GBLT hate crimes in DC, condemns that violence in the harshest terms, and pledges all necessary city resources to fight it.

II. Compliance with existing law in submitting an annual report on hate crimes to the City Council

III. The following immediate commitments from the MPD:
a. Hate Crimes training for the entire police force, especially on reporting
b. Sensitivity training when dealing with GLBT victims
c. Staffing of the Gay and Lesbian Liaison Unit (GLLU) to the level it was at the beginning of the Fenty Administration

IV. Support for the following:
a. Meeting with Chancellor Rhee of DCPS
b. Meeting with DCAG
c. Meeting with the newly-appointed United States Attorney for DC upon appointment
d. Faith communities outreach

V. For DCPS – measurable goals for decreasing incidents of anti-GLBT harassment and support for student awareness campaigns

VI. Publicly support the establishment of a Panel to address hate crimes against the GLBT community in DC with the mission of outlining the problem and recommending actions and solutions to address it. Panel should be on a short timeline and include, at a minimum, representatives from the following: the GLBT community, the Mayor's office, the MPD, the USAO (if possible), the AG's office, DCPS, and faith communities. The recommendations of the Panel should be made public.

The hearing has been called in response to recent incidents that have heightened community concern over whether law enforcement is responding effectively to reduce the occurrence of hate crime. As indicated in the hearing notice released by Committee Chairman Phil Mendelson, "a recent Washington Post editorial cited FBI statistics that show while the District mirrors the nation in a reduction of racial-bias crimes, according the MPD statistics, hate crimes based on sexual orientation account for the 'overwhelming majority of hate crimes in the city.' "

The hearing will be held at noon on Friday, Dec. 12 in the Wilson Building's 5th Floor Council Chambers, 1350 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.

In a letter addressed to Taylor, Farris and Metrokin criticized the attorney's office's assertion that "Mr. Hunter's death stemmed from an 'altercation' with the defendant that the victim sexually assaulted the defendant prior to the defendant's attacking him." The GLOV representatives called the allegation "absurd," unsupported and against "common sense."

"[G]ay men do not approach random men on street corners and grab their crotches—to believe this version of events, based solely on the self-serving words of someone facing murder charges, is to succumb to homophobic bias," the letter reads.

GLOV's full letter is after the jump.

Jeffery A. Taylor
United States Attorney's Office
555 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Dear Mr. Taylor:

We are writing to express our serious concerns about the case being handled by your Office involving the death of Tony Randolph Hunter near 8th and N St, NW. The case is US v. Hanna (there may or may not be an "h" at the end of the name).

Mr. Hunter and a friend of his were brutally attacked by 4 men on September 7 as they were walking to a local gay bar. They had just come from a gospel concert. Mr. Hunter was left in a coma and eventually died. The second victim, as the police report notes, had visible bruising around his face from the attack. The police noted that this was a bias crime in their report, and the police have ruled out robbery as a motive.

There seems to be a conclusion by your office and the MPD (as noted by the Chief of Police's claim at the press conference announcing the arrest that Mr. Hunter's death stemmed from an "altercation" with the defendant) that the victim sexually assaulted the defendant prior to the defendant's attacking him. The only evidence that has been provided to support this absurd allegation are (1) the self-serving words of the defendant and (2) the testimony of someone who is apparently a friend of the defendant.

On the other hand, there is a mountain of evidence against this claim — there are witnesses in the arrest affidavit who claim the attack was random. More importantly, there is the statement by the second victim of the attack. Finally, there is common sense: gay men do not approach random men on street corners and grab their crotches – to believe this version of events, based solely on the self-serving words of someone facing murder charges, is to succumb to homophobic bias. This is especially true in this case, where the allegation is that Mr. Hunter walked up to a group of 4 strangers at night in a dangerous neighborhood on his way into a gay bar with a friend to meet other friends who were waiting for him. It is non-sensical in every way.

The defendant was initially charged with voluntary manslaughter instead of second degree murder, presumably because of the "altercation" that preceded the attack. In relying on testimony and evidence your Office provided at a preliminary hearing in the matter, the judge reduced the charge to involuntary manslaughter, and ordered the defendant – a man clearly responsible for the death of innocent Tony Hunter — released on home arrest. Accordingly, the version being put forth by your Office has real consequences.

We would also note that the arrest warrant makes no mention of the second victim or of the other 3 attackers. In fact, at this point, it is not clear whether anyone in your Office is even looking for the other 3 attackers. More striking, no one from your Office contacted the second victim until after the preliminary hearing — after the judge reduced the charge. This again is non-sensical.

We write to ask that you personally intervene to be sure that this case is being handled appropriately, and that no one in your Office is allowing homophobic prejudices and bias influence their handling of the case or their acceptance of the defendant's version of events. We also write to ask that you be sure someone is looking to take the other three attackers off of our streets.

This murder comes against the backdrop of what appears to be a sharp increase in attacks on the gay and lesbian community in this City. It is urgent that your Office treat the cases that come to you aggressively, fairly, and — most importantly — without bias.

Sincerely,
Chris Farris & Todd Metrokin
Co-Chairmen
GLOV

On the books, it's "Voluntary Manslaughter." To activists, it's a "Hate Crime."

D.C. didn't know much about Tony Randolph Hunter when police found his body, "lying supine on the ground" with a "laceration on the back of his head," near Shaw's BeBar on the night of Sept. 7. When police initially classified the 37-year-old Maryland man's beating as a potential hate crime, they did so based on the few details they could ascertain about the victim: who he was and where he was going. The assailants, police reasoned, may have been acting on the same basic information—that Hunter was gay and headed to a gay bar—in an attack that had no immediately apparent motive.

In police reports, descriptions of suspects similarly lack specifics. In the case of Tony Hunter, the report identified the suspects as four black males between the ages of 19 and 22, dressed in blue jeans and T-shirts. Other recent attacks against gays produce similar descriptors. In the July 13 beating of Todd Metrokin, the assailants were described as black men between the ages of 17 and 21. In a Sept. 27 incident in Dupont, a gay couple dodged the word "faggot"—and a heaved brick—from a black man they later identified as a security guard at the Metropole.

As cases progress, however, assumptions of type give way to particulars. Unlike the cases of Metrokin and the Dupont couple, which police investigators identified as hate-bias motivated, Hunter's assault was missing one telltale sign of a hate crime: There was no evidence that "faggot" or any other epithet was uttered. Shortly into the investigation of Hunter's case, police began referring to the beating as an apparent robbery, citing car keys and cash that appeared to be missing from Hunter's body. By the time Hunter died, succumbing to what the medical examiner described as "Blunt Impact Head Trauma" 10 days after the attack, police had abandoned the suspected motive of anti-gay prejudice. "There is nothing to indicate at this time that this crime was motivated by hate or bias," wrote police department spokesperson Traci Hughes the day after Hunter's death. Later that day, Matt Ashburn of the police department's Gay and Lesbian Liason Unit supported Hughes' statement, writing: "[T]he crime is NOT classified as a hate/bias crime."

The hate-crime declassification by police investigators came several days before they had the chance to interview the alleged assailant in the case: Robert "Rob" Hannah, the most wanted of the suspects cited in the police report. Several members of the GLBT community similarly decried the incident as a "hate crime" before Hannah's identity was made public. Dana Fonville, identifying himself as a friend of Hunter's, told the Washington Blade, "The police tell us they don't have evidence that this was a hate crime and that it was a robbery. But the person or persons who did this committed a senseless and hateful act." During a vigil in Hunter's honor, the Rev. Abena McCray of D.C.'s Unity Fellowship Church prayed for a victim of hate. "We ask you for a healing, Lord, at this space where someone's head was beaten for no real reason other than ignorance," the Blade reports McCray as saying.

Prosecutors, however, have their own standards for determining hate crimes; after reviewing the facts, the U.S. Attorney's Office chose not to pursue the hate-crime enhancement in Hannah's case. Special Liaison Unit commander Brett Parson noted that "hate crime" often means different things to police, prosecutors, and the community they serve. "It depends if you're asking from a legal perspective or a general person's perspective," says Parson. "Once the facts become public, the people will draw their own conclusions from it." In the Hunter case, lack of the legal hate-crime tag has left community members to classify the incident themselves as a type of "unofficial" hate crime. Police and prosecutors could find no hard evidence to pursue a hate-crime investigation; the community, meanwhile, could find no other explanation as to why a gay man was dead.

Last week, police arrested Hannah and charged him with voluntary manslaughter in Hunter's death. In an affidavit filed in D.C. Superior Court, the motive in the case was again modified; in place of the robbery scenario, the incident was now being described as an "altercation." Despite the previous abandonment of the hate-crime motive, Hunter's sexual orientation arose again in the affidavit as a potential basis of the attack. In a police interview, Hannah and one other witness claimed that the "altercation" was incited when Hunter sexually assaulted Hannah, coming up behind him, groping his ass and touching his testicles. The witness, an acquaintance of Hannah's, noted that the victim "appeared to be 'Gay.'" A different witness on the scene, though, claims a group of men approached Hunter and proceeded to beat him; yet another witness claims to have seen Hannah standing over Hunter's body and chanting the name of his crew, the Terrace, before leaving the scene. Neither of those witnesses mentions the alleged come-on.

With the lines in the case already drawn, Hannah's version of events has incited new calls of "hate crime" from the gay community. Todd Metrokin and Chris Farris—who together led the charge to resurrect D.C.'s Gays and Lesbians Opposing Violence (GLOV) group last month–say that the suspect's very defense in the case is enough to support a hate-crime investigation. "It looks like they're going with manslaughter because of something we call the 'gay panic' defense," says Metrokin. It's a defense Farris calls both "familiar" and "repugnant." "The fact that the suspect is pointing to gayness as an excuse shows the requisite bias," Farris says. "That the defendant is even coming up with this story shows that it's a hate crime."

More pressing than the abandonment of the hate crime classification, Farris and Metrokin say, is the charge of voluntary manslaughter. Farris says the charge indicates that prosecutors have neglected to look beyond Hannah's "gay panic" story to other possible motives in the case. "It is hard for me to imagine how randomly coming upon somebody and punching them to the point where he falls over and becomes unconscious and then dies is anything short of murder," says Farris. "I'm not a criminal law expert, but if this is legally not considered murder, we're going to have to change the law."

While the determination between manslaughter and murder comes down to discerning the intent to kill, classifying hate crimes means dealing in murkier psychological territory. The District of Columbia passed its hate-crime legislation, the Bias-Related Crime Act of 1989, nearly 20 years ago. According to D.C. code, a hate crime is defined as "a designated act that demonstrates an accused's prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibility, physical disability, matriculation or political affiliation of a victim."

A mental bias against homosexuals can be almost impossible to prove without a more concrete expression of it—written or verbal epithets, for example, or membership in an organized anti-gay group. Even the Dupont couple, who say they dodged a very real brick along with verbal epithets and threats of future intimidation, were told there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute the offender. The U.S. Attorney's office dismissed the couple's case; in an e-mail, spokesperson Channing Phillips told Metro Weekly, "as unpleasant and demeaning as 'name-calling' may be, words alone are not a crime." The couple's validation is also of the unofficial type: According to the Washington Blade, the suspect has been removed from his security post at the Metropole.

Official statistics under-represent crimes within the GLBT community in many ways: According to FBI crime stats, only a female can be raped, for example, and transgender persons are officially ignored. The hate-crime motive is so difficult to determine that reports are nothing if not woefully inaccurate; Farris and Metrokin say their crusade for the hate crime classification is more to make sure crimes against gays go reported than to allow for harsher sentencing of the accused. Still, enough crimes satisfy the necessary criteria to make D.C. a statistical anomaly among states that report hate crime data. As local gay rights activists are quick to point out, the majority of the District's reported hate crimes are based on sexual orientation bias. In 2006, 60 percent of the 57 hate crimes in D.C. reported to the FBI were biased against sexual orientation; the national average is just over 15 percent. The most recent Police Department stats for 2008 show nearly 75 percent of hate crimes in D.C. to be based on sexual orientation. Less reported, though, is the other strange truth of D.C. hate crime stats: While most hate crimes nationwide are committed by whites, in D.C.—a city with a 60 percent black population—many hate-crime offenders are minorities, too.

It is in borderline cases like Hunter's that this fact—that hate crimes in D.C. amount to one minority group attacking another—becomes most complicated. Like Hunter, little is publicly known about Robert Hannah beyond his initial description in the police report. Most can be inferred from Hannah's photograph on the wanted flyer announcing the warrant for his arrest: Hannah is a black man; at 18 years old, he is slightly younger than the report imagined. The only other info on Hannah, whose name in official reports is spelled with and without the final "h," is that he's last known to have resided in a Shaw apartment complex, and that he is connected with the Terrace, which the affidavit describes as "a group of subjects who live in or frequent the areas of 6th & N Street, 7th & N Street, as well as the area of 8th & N Street NW." In short, we know little more about Hannah than who he was and where he was going.

When BeBar opened in 2006, it situated itself at a borderline of District gentrification, only a few blocks from both Hannah's apartment and the Walter E. Washington Convention Center. The little we know about Tony Randolph Hunter indicates that he also represented an intersection of D.C. culture—Hunter was both black and gay. A Blade piece on the Sept. 30 vigil for Hunter nodded to the divide. "Following a memorial service for Hunter at the church, participants walked about five blocks through the heart of the city's Shaw neighborhood to the site where Hunter was attacked at 8th and N Streets," wrote Blade reporter Lou Chibbaro Jr. "Before reaching their destination, participants walked past public housing projects that city officials say are home to some of the youth gangs, or crews, that have been implicated in a rash of violent muggings and shootings in the neighborhood."

Such casual neighborhood glances point to the complicated intersection of biases that comes to play in these unofficial hate crimes. Absent the epithet, hate-group card, or admission of guilt, the importance of a victim's "actual or perceived" sexual orientation in a crime comes down to the suspect's perceived bias. Is an after-the-fact excuse—an invocation of the gay panic defense—enough to prove prejudice? Or was it always enough that Hunter was a gay black man, and Hannah a straight one? Both sides, in absence of specifics, return to type. "What they're asking us to believe is that a man from Maryland parked his car to go into a gay bar and on his way walked up to a group of strangers and reached out to one of them and grabbed him below the waist. This is not believable," Farris says. "Here's what they know: That a thug says he killed somebody because a guy grabbed his crotch. The bias there is evident."

Photo by Darrow Montgomery.

Metrokin and Farris list five outstanding questions they have with the city's handling of the case, including the police's change of the classification of the crime from "robbery" to "altercation" and the lack of charges filed against a second victim in the attack:

1) The police report classifed this as a bias crime based on sexual orientation, It also stated robbery was a motive, and listed a cellphone, car keys, and cash that was stolen. Now, the police claim that this was an "altercation." Why the change?

2) The arrest warrant identifies two witnesses who claim that there was a sexual advance that preceded the attack. One is the defendent, and the other is someone who knows him. Is that all they have? The charge – voluntary manslaugher, instead of murder – seems to be based on this account (otherwise, it would be at least second-degree murder). Why would a case precede on that testimony, which is obviously suspect? The arrest warrant identifies another witness who confirms the second victim's account, so it is baffling as to why the version put forth by the defendant and his friend seems to be guiding this case.

3) Why have no charges been filed in the attack on the second victim? The police report clearly indicates that there was a second vicitm with bruises.

4) Why hasn't the DA's office contacted the second vicitm, either about charges in his case or as a witness in Tony Hunter's case?

5) Why have charges been filed against only one suspect, when the police report says there were 4, as does the second victim?

Full press release after the jump.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Charges in Tony R. Hunter Case Raises More Questions Than Answers

WASHINGTON DC, October 17, 2008 – As more facts are unveiled in the recent arrest and manslaughter charge in the death of Tony Randolph Hunter, members of GLOV are left searching for answers and concerned about the path the city's case seems to be taking."

"Part of GLOV's mission is to monitor cases to ensure that the rights and dignity of glbt victims are respected and protected," says co-chairman Chris Farris. "That's why we're shocked at the apparent "gay panic" defense and subsequent charge of manslaughter in Tony's murder which don't seem to support the facts of this case. So many questions remain that we're wondering how CAREFUL the MPD and District Attorney are being."

We encourage the media to uncover the truth about this murder. GLOV is pursuing answers to the following questions:

1) The police report classifed this as a bias crime based on sexual orientation, It also stated robbery was a motive, and listed a cellphone, car keys, and cash that was stolen. Now, the police claim that this was an "altercation." Why the change?

2) The arrest warrant identifies two witnesses who claim that there was a sexual advance that preceded the attack. One is the defendent, and the other is someone who knows him. Is that all they have? The charge – voluntary manslaugher, instead of murder – seems to be based on this account (otherwise, it would be at least second-degree murder). Why would a case precede on that testimony, which is obviously suspect? The arrest warrant identifies another witness who confirms the second victim's account, so it is baffling as to why the version put forth by the defendant and his friend seems to be guiding this case.

3) Why have no charges been filed in the attack on the second victim? The police report clearly indicates that there was a second vicitm with bruises.

4) Why hasn't the DA's office contacted the second vicitm, either about charges in his case or as a witness in Tony Hunter's case?

5) Why have charges been filed against only one suspect, when the police report says there were 4, as does the second victim?