District of Columbia
Judge dismisses gay D.C. cop’s bias lawsuit
Former officer claimed anti-gay harassment and retaliation
In a little-noticed development, a federal judge on Feb. 21 of this year dismissed a lawsuit filed in 2015 by gay former D.C. police officer Christopher Lilly accusing fellow officers and supervisors of subjecting him to discrimination, harassment, and retaliation based on his sexual orientation.
In a 65-page ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan explained why he approved a motion filed by the District of Columbia requesting a summary judgement decision dismissing the case based on the assertion that the lawsuit lacked sufficient evidence to substantiate that discrimination of any kind took place.
The motion was filed by attorneys with the Office of the D.C. Attorney General, who represented the District and the Metropolitan Police Department of Washington, D.C., who were named as defendants in the lawsuit filed by Lilly.
Neither Lilly nor his attorney, Sameera Ali of the D.C. law firm Ali, White & Coleman, responded to a request by the Washington Blade seeking comment on the judge’s ruling.
Lilly charged in his lawsuit filed in May 2015 that between 2011 and 2013 he was subjected, among other things, to repeated anti-gay name-calling and other forms of harassment, including the placement of more than a dozen AIDS awareness stickers on his locker at the Fourth Police District, where he was stationed.
At the time he saw the AIDS stickers on his locker he also saw that someone wrote the word “fag” on the locker and poured a white liquid on the floor next to the locker simulating semen, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit says the discriminatory actions began shortly after December 2010 when “without plaintiff Lilly’s knowledge or consent, his sexual orientation, homosexual, was publicized maliciously and intentionally” at the Fourth District.
“Following plaintiff Lilly’s ‘outing,’ any other officer to come into contact with plaintiff Lilly subjected him to scrutiny, retaliation and ridicule by means of vulgar language, slandering his name and abilities to function as a police officer and questioning his abilities to serve due to his sexual orientation,” the lawsuit alleged.
The lawsuit, among other things, charged D.C., through the actions of police officials, with violating the D.C. Human Rights Act, which bans discrimination based on sexual orientation, and violating Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964, by discriminating against Lilly because of his gender and sexual orientation, creating a hostile work environment, and retaliating against him when he raised objections to the alleged discrimination.
In his ruling dismissing the case, Judge Sullivan points to arguments in the District’s answer to the lawsuit filed in 2020 and in the District’s motion calling for summary judgement, that Lilly failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his allegations.
The judge also cited what he described as multiple undisputed facts presented by the AG Office attorneys showing that Lilly had faced disciplinary actions for breaching police rules, including not showing up for work or showing up late for his shift of duty.
Other allegations by the MPD against Lilly, which Judge Sullivan says were unrelated to his sexual orientation, involved the temporary revocation of his police powers in 2012 due to alleged emotional stress he faced from a work-related exposure to bedbugs, according to the judge’s account of court filings.
“A few days later, Mr. Lilly was referred by MPD officials for a Psychological Fitness for Duty Evaluation,” the judge states in his ruling.
“Gloria Morote, a licensed clinical psychologist, evaluated Mr. Lilly on October 10, 2012, and October 24, 2012, alongside MPD referral documents informing her that ‘following a period of good service, Officer Lilly’s performance and appearance began to deteriorate in August/September 2012,’ including ‘two major investigations for neglect of duty,’ ‘deterioration’ in his mental condition, and ‘marked nervousness and erratic behavior while on-duty after exposure to bedbugs,’” the judge wrote in his ruling.
Over the next several months, the judge’s ruling states, Lilly continued to get into trouble for being late for work and other breaches of police rules leading up to May 22, 2013, when “Mr. Lilly was placed on administrative leave after ‘rambling’ with ‘glassy’ eyes to a commanding officer about being sent by his family to a ‘funny farm,’” Judge Sullivan continues in is ruling.
“Then, on May 31, 2013, Mr. Lilly self-admitted into Dominion Hospital, a mental health facility in Virginia, to receive psychiatric treatment,” Sullivan states.
He reports in his ruling that based on Lilly’s record of infractions of police rules and his mental health status, the Police and Firefighters’ Retirement and Relief Board (PFRRB) “ordered Mr. Lilly’s retirement, determining that he was incapacitated from further duty by reason of a disability incurred in the performance of duty, and his retirement took effect on August 16, 2013.”
Court records show that under this forced retirement order Lilly would receive 40 percent of his salary as part of his retirement benefit.
“Drawing every justifiable inference in Mr. Lilly’s favor, as the Court must do, it finds no basis under Title VII or the D.C. Human Rights Act upon which a reasonable fact finder could conclude that the District had discriminatory intent based on his gender and/or sexual orientation or was retaliating against him for taking part in a protected activity,” Sullivan concludes in his ruling. “Accordingly, the District’s Motion for Summary Judgement, EFC No. 45, is granted.”
The judge described his action as a “final appealable order,” which indicates that Lilly could appeal the ruling to the D.C. Court of Appeals.
Lilly and his lawyer, Sameera Ali, couldn’t immediately be reached to determine whether Lilly plans to appeal the decision.
Shortly after Lilly’s lawsuit was filed, officials with the MPD and the Office of the Attorney General declined to comment, saying they could not discuss issues surrounding a pending lawsuit. But then Assistant D.C. Police Chief Peter Newsham, who later became Chief of Police, told the Blade the department does not tolerate discrimination.
“I can’t talk about a specific lawsuit,” he said. “But I can tell you about how we don’t tolerate bias by any members of this police department,” said Newsham. “It’s something we take very seriously. And if we become aware of it, corrective action will be taken all the way up to removal if it was severe enough,” he said.
District of Columbia
U.S. Attorney’s Office drops hate crime charge in anti-gay assault
Case remains under investigation and ‘further charges’ could come
D.C. police announced on Feb. 9 that they had arrested two days earlier on Feb. 7 a Germantown, Md., man on a charge of simple assault with a hate crime designation after the man allegedly assaulted a gay man at 14th and Q Streets, N.W., while using “homophobic slurs.”
But D.C. Superior Court records show that prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C., which prosecutes D.C. violent crime cases, charged the arrested man only with simple assault without a hate crime designation.
In response to a request by the Washington Blade for the reason why the hate crime designation was dropped, a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s office provided this response: “We continue to investigate this matter and make no mistake: should the evidence call for further charges, we will not hesitate to charge them.”
In a statement announcing the arrest in this case, D.C. police stated, “On Saturday, February 7, 2026, at approximately 7:45 p.m. the victim and suspect were in the 1500 block of 14th Street, Northwest. The suspect requested a ‘high five’ from the victim. The victim declined and continued walking,” the statement says.
“The suspect assaulted the victim and used homophobic slurs,” the police statement continues. “The suspect was apprehended by responding officers.”
It adds that 26-year-old Dean Edmundson of Germantown, Md. “was arrested and charged with Simple Assault (Hate/Bias).” The statement also adds, “A designation as a hate crime by MPD does not mean that prosecutors will prosecute it as a hate crime.”
Under D.C.’s Bias Related Crime Act of 1989, penalties for crimes motivated by prejudice against individuals based on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, and homelessness can be enhanced by a court upon conviction by one and a half times greater than the penalty of the underlying crime.
Prosecutors in the past both in D.C. and other states have said they sometimes decide not to include a hate crime designation in assault cases if they don’t think the evidence is sufficient to obtain a conviction by a jury. In some instances, prosecutors have said they were concerned that a skeptical jury might decide to find a defendant not guilty of the underlying assault charge if they did not believe a motive of hate was involved.
A more detailed arrest affidavit filed by D.C. police in Superior Court appears to support the charge of a hate crime designation.
“The victim stated that they refused to High-Five Defendant Edmondson, which, upon that happening, Defendant Edmondson started walking behind both the victim and witness, calling the victim, “bald, ugly, and gay,” the arrest affidavit states.
“The victim stated that upon being called that, Defendant Edmundson pushed the victim with both hands, shoving them, causing the victim to feel the force of the push,” the affidavit continues. “The victim stated that they felt offended and that they were also gay,” it says.
District of Columbia
Capital Pride wins anti-stalking order against local activist
Darren Pasha claims action is linked to his criticism of Pride organizers
A D.C. Superior Court judge on Feb. 6 partially approved an anti-stalking order against a local LGBTQ activist requested last October by the Capital Pride Alliance, the D.C.-based LGBTQ group that organizes the city’s annual Pride events.
The ruling by Judge Robert D. Okun requires Darren Pasha to stay at least 100 feet away from Capital Pride’s staff, board members, and volunteers until the time of a follow up court hearing he scheduled for April 17.
In his ruling at the Feb. 6 hearing, which was virtual rather than held in-person at the courthouse, Okun said he had changed the distance that Capital Pride had requested for the stay-away, anti-stalking order from 200 yards to 100 feet. The court records show that the judge also denied a motion filed earlier by Pasha, who did not attend the hearing, to “quash” the Capital Pride civil case against him.
Pasha told the Washington Blade he suffered an injury and damaged his mobile phone by falling off his scooter on the city’s snow-covered streets that prevented him from calling in to join the Feb. 6 court hearing.
In his own court filings without retaining an attorney, Pasha has strongly denied the stalking related allegations against him by Capital Pride, saying “no credible or admissible evidence has been provided” to show he engaged in any wrongdoing.
The Capital Pride complaint initially filed in court on Oct. 27, 2025, includes an 18-page legal brief outlining its allegations against Pasha and an additional 167-page addendum of “supporting exhibits” that includes multiple statements by witnesses whose names are blacked out.
“Over the past year, Defendant Darren Pasha (“DSP”) has engaged in a sustained, and escalating course of conduct directed at CPA, including repeated and unwanted contact, harassment, intimidation, threats, manipulation, and coercive behavior targeting CPA staff, board members, volunteers, and affiliates,” the Capital Pride complaint states.
In his initial 16-page response to the complaint, Pasha says the Capital Pride complaint appears to be a form of retaliation against him for a dispute he has had with the organization and its then president, Ashley Smith, last year.
“It is evident that the document is replete with false, misleading, and unsubstantiated assertions,” he said of the complaint.
Smith, who has since resigned from his role as board president, did not respond to a request by the Blade for comment at the time the Capital Pride court complaint was filed against Pasha.
Capital Pride Executive Director Ryan Bos and the attorney representing the group in its legal action against Pasha, Nick Harrison, did not immediately respond to a Blade request for comment on the judge’s Feb. 6 ruling.
District of Columbia
D.C. pays $500,000 to settle lawsuit brought by gay Corrections Dept. employee
Alleged years of verbal harassment, slurs, intimidation
The D.C. government on Feb. 5 agreed to pay $500,000 to a gay D.C. Department of Corrections officer as a settlement to a lawsuit the officer filed in 2021 alleging he was subjected to years of discrimination at his job because of his sexual orientation, according to a statement released by the American Civil Liberties Union of D.C.
The statement says the lawsuit, filed on behalf of Sgt. Deon Jones by the ACLU of D.C. and the law firm WilmerHale, alleged that the Department of Corrections, including supervisors and co-workers, “subjected Sgt. Jones to discrimination, retaliation, and a hostile work environment because of his identity as a gay man, in violation of the D.C. Human Rights Act.”
Daniel Gleick, a spokesperson for D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, said the mayor’s office would have no comment on the lawsuit settlement. A spokesperson for the Office of the D.C. Attorney General, which represents the city against lawsuits, said the office has a longstanding policy of not commenting on litigation like the Deon Jones lawsuit.
Bowser and her high-level D.C. government appointees, including Japer Bowles, director of the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs, have spoken out against LGBTQ-related discrimination.
“Jones, now a 28-year veteran of the Department and nearing retirement, faced years of verbal abuse and harassment from coworkers and incarcerated people alike, including anti-gay slurs, threats, and degrading treatment,” the ACLU’s statement says.
“The prolonged mistreatment took a severe toll on Jones’s mental health, and he experienced depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and 15 anxiety attacks in 2021 alone,” it says.
“For years, I showed up to do my job with professionalism and pride, only to be targeted because of who I am,” Jones says in the ACLU statement. “This settlement affirms that my pain mattered – and that creating hostile workplaces has real consequences,” he said.
He added, “For anyone who is LGBTQ or living with a disability and facing workplace discrimination or retaliation, know this: you are not powerless. You have rights. And when you stand up, you can achieve justice.”
The settlement agreement, a link to which the ACLU provided in its statement announcing the settlement, states that plaintiff Jones agrees, among other things, that “neither the Parties’ agreement, nor the District’s offer to settle the case, shall in any way be construed as an admission by the District that it or any of its current or former employees, acted wrongfully with respect to Plaintiff or any other person, or that Plaintiff has any rights.”
Scott Michelman, the D.C. ACLU’s legal director said that type of disclaimer is typical for parties that agree to settle a lawsuit like this.
“But actions speak louder than words,” he told the Blade. “The fact that they are paying our client a half million dollars for the pervasive and really brutal harassment that he suffered on the basis of his identity for years is much more telling than their disclaimer itself,” he said.
The settlement agreement also says Jones would be required, as a condition for accepting the agreement, to resign permanently from his job at the Department of Corrections. ACLU spokesperson Andy Hoover said Jones has been on administrative leave since March 2022. Jones couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.
“This is really something that makes sense on both sides,” Michelman said of the resignation requirements. “The environment had become so toxic the way he had been treated on multiple levels made it difficult to see how he could return to work there.”
CMS moves to expand HIV-positive organ transplants
Shooter who killed 7 people inside Canada school was transgender
Russia’s anti-LGBTQ crackdown takes absurd turn
McPike wins special election for Va. House of Delegates
As Oscars approach, it’s time to embrace ‘KPop Demon Hunters’
PHOTOS: Drag in rural Virginia
New book explores homosexuality in ancient cultures
I keep getting rejected on the apps
Gay man details secret struggle with bulimia
