Legal Speaks Home Debbie Hines Bio Blog TV Clips Practice Areas Res Ipsa Loquitur Links Contact
Blog Home

Archive for October, 2014

First DC Attorney General Race Heats Up

Wednesday, October 22nd, 2014
Debbie Hines, Author

Debbie Hines, Author

Having written a letter commentary to the Washington Post editorial board on October 21, 2010 on why the DC Attorney General should be elected, I am elated to see that day has finally arrived with five viable and diverse candidates seeking the office of Attorney General for the District of Columbia. The 5 candidates seeking the office are attorneys Lorie Masters, Karl Racine, Edward “Smitty” Smith, Lateefah Williams and Paul Zukerberg. I was finally able to see all 5 together in a forum on Tuesday, October 21 hosted by the Women’s Bar Association  and moderated by Zoe Tillman, reporter for the National Law Journal/Legal Times.

At the outset, I must say there are many similarities between the candidates on some of the issues. And in all honesty, I wish I could clone them into one candidate placing their best qualities in one person. When asked what would be their number one priority for the office of Attorney General, they all gave practically the same answer. Each candidate wanted to build integrity, have honest transparency and end corruption.

Lorie Masters is a former president of the Women’s Bar Association and was a prior managing partner at her law firm. Masters like Karl Racine comes from a large corporate law firm background. Paul Zukerberg is a solo practitioner who is responsible for fighting the fight to ensure that the election for Attorney General is being held in November, 2014 and not some later date. After the DC residents voted to hold elections for the office, the DC City council sought to table the elections for a while. And Mr. Zukerberg fought the District of Columbia government in court and won. As an attorney, he shows he is able to take on the City Council and win. However, based on his background as a solo practitioner for decades, I was concerned about his ability to actually lead an office of the magnitude of the DC Attorney General office although I truly admire his true grit and guts. Lateefah Williams is the most grass roots activist among the five candidates, citing her desire to host forums in the city and advocate for the most vulnerable in the city.

In narrowing down the choices, two candidates impressed me that they would be more able to head the DC Attorney General’s office. Those two candidates are Edward “Smitty” Smith and Karl Racine. I admire that Edward Smith or “Smitty” as he says he likes to be called, came from Anacostia, one of the worst neighborhoods in the District of Columbia, earned a degree from Harvard Law School and is a true public servant by his professional background. At age 34, he has a most impressive background. Smith, like Mr. Racine, has managed teams of employees. I believe that he would understand the challenges facing juveniles in the DC juvenile justice system, reform the juvenile justice system and advocate for consumers. His public servant background will fit well with the DC Attorney General’s office.

Mr. Racine has the experience of public service like Mr. Smith, having served as a former Assistant Public Defender. He was the one candidate who gave very specifics answers to the question on who he has spoken to at the DC Attorney General’s office to get a sense of the present office. And in understanding the limits of the DC Attorney General’s budget, he seemed willing to build upon law school clinics to assist in some areas of the office. Mr. Racine says that he is the only candidate who will be best able to hit the ground running if he is elected. More importantly, he is the one who has clearly demonstrated that he has managed hundreds of lawyers and employees for 6 years with a large budget as the managing partner at his law firm, Venable. The Attorney General’s office has almost 600 employees.

While all of the 5 candidates make good lawyers, Mr. Racine has demonstrated that he could actually run an office with hundreds of lawyers and employees and more amply understand their needs. It will take more than being able to read a budget to run an office of the size of the Attorney General’s office. Emphasizing that he would ensure adequate training for the attorneys shows he understands an aspect of the morale issue at the Attorney General’s office and he is willing to give support to the lawyers. Mr. Racine’s qualifications slightly nudge out Mr. Smith. In picking one candidate for DC Attorney General, I would have to say that person would be Karl Racine. The election is November 4. Early voting has already started.

Plot Thickens in Missing UVA Student Case

Tuesday, October 21st, 2014



A whirlwind of events happened recently in the missing University Of Virginia student Hannah Graham case following Jesse Matthew’s arrest on charges of abduction and intent to defile in Charlottesville.  Unfortunately those events include finding skeletal human remains which may be those of Hannah Graham.  The State Medical Examiner’s office in Richmond, VA has the remains and will determine the cause of death and the identity of the remains.  Jesse Matthew now faces a new indictment handed down on Monday, October 20 in a 2005 attempted murder, abduction and sexual assault case for a then 26 year old woman in Fairfax County.   And there still remains an unsolved 2009 case of Morgan Harrington who went missing and was found dead in 2010.  Police have confirmed the forensics in the Harrington case match those of the 2005 and Hannah Graham case. No indictment has been issued in the Harrington case.


Forensic evidence has now linked Jesse Matthew to three cases, Hannah Graham, Morgan Harrington and the 2005 sexual assault abduction.  Once Jesse Matthew’s DNA was in the criminal justice system’s crime database,  the police were able to link his DNA obtained in the Hannah Graham investigation to Morgan Harrington’s murder and the 2005 case identified only as “RG” due to the sexual assault nature of the case and the victim.  And now, the police may be looking to see if Matthew’s DNA is involved in cases when he was a juvenile.   The earlier charges of rape and sex assault while he attended two separate colleges were not pursued in the criminal justice system.   He has been ruled out as a suspect in two 2003 Newport News cases.


The next stage in the Matthew’s matter will be an arrest warrant or bench warrant to bring Matthew from Charlottesville in Albermarle County to Fairfax County to face the charges there and enter an attorney’s appearance.  It is too early yet to determine which jurisdiction will be the first to prosecute him at a trial.  Matthew’s next court appearance in Charlottesville will be on December 4.   On Thursday, October 22, the bench warrant will be issued to bring him to Fairfax county to face charges there.


On Tuesday, October 21, 2014, I provided legal analysis on the case as seen on Fox 5 News.  More updates will be provided as the cases  and investigation continues.

Is Domestic Violence the Cost of Doing Business for the NFL

Saturday, October 18th, 2014
Ray Rice @ Wikipedia

Ray Rice @ Wikipedia

Almost midway through the NFL football season following the Ray Rice domestic violence, the   incident seems to have had no effect on fans viewing games which means the bottom line of the NFL is quite secure.  Reports  obtained by Reuters from Nielson shows that fan viewership in the first month of the season increased this year on ESPN, CBS and NBC.  And like many major corporations, the NFL may believe  that if their bottom line is intact, it can weather the storm and carry on with business as usual.


In cases involving major corporations, the economic hit to the bottom line is what matters in most cases, more than people.  It’s what is called putting profits over people. Whether it’s a major car manufacturer as with Toyota’s Prius and Camry unintended acceleration and brake malfunctions allegedly causing injury and death and massive recalls which resulted in so far over 1 billion dollar in payouts to car owners.  Toyota’s image or sales have not been tarnished.   And in the case of major drug manufacturer, Merck, agreed to pay over $4 billion to settle almost 30,000 claims of those who took Vioxx   and were injured or died as a result.  Erik Gordon, a pharmaceutical analyst says it’s just the cost of doing business. As long as the bottom line stays intact, many corporations are satisfied with doing little to make changes going forward.  In this regard, the NFL appears no different than a Merck or Toyota.


During his press release in September, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell says he intends to make changes to the NFL’s domestic violence policy or lack thereof by the date of the Super Bowl. By the time Commissioner Goodell decides to issue protocols in February, 2015, it will have been 1 year since the Ray Rice incident and the football season will have concluded.  Unless some new major development is discovered in the Rice incident, or new allegations of domestic violence arise in other cases or someone dies as a result of domestic violence, it will be easy for the NFL to treat the Rice incident as the cost of doing business.


Despite denials from some within the NFL, Jerry Angelo, a former Chicago Bears general manager spoke out about hundreds of domestic violence complaints during his 30 years in the league that went unpunished.  Being able to acknowledge that a past history exists of wrongdoings, is one way to move towards changing the future.  How can the NFL move forward if it will not admit to its past wrongdoings beyond the Ray Rice incident? It did not only get the Ray Rice incident wrong, there is a pattern and practice of wrongdoing in the NFL that spans decades.  Going back to famed NFL player Jim Brown who in 1968 faced his first of many domestic violence charges, an assault with intent to murder, with other  domestic violence charges following in 1985, 1986 and 1999.   One of the most egregious domestic violence cases was former Carolina Panthers player, Rae Carruth, who was found guilty of conspiracy to commit murder on his pregnant girlfriend in 1999.   A USA Today database that tracks NFL player arrests since 2000 found there were 87 domestic violence arrests among 80 players. And these numbers only deal with arrests and not  actual complaints that did not result in an arrest.


In order to prevent the NFL from lapsing back into its status of business as usual, it will  first take the efforts of   many advocates against domestic violence, many women’s organizations and the general public to muster a moral pulse for the NFL.    Future discussions will be held with the NFL and representatives of the Women’s Black Roundtable following their October 2, 2014 meeting with NFL representatives.  The NFL has named an anti-violence policy group that will meet regularly to assist in designing a league protocol on handling domestic violence. However, there must be more action taken on the domestic violence issue in the NFL to prevent future incidents from occurring or to prevent someone’s life from being taken by a NFL player.


The issue of domestic violence is a complex issue in the NFL.  And it must have a comprehensive approach in dealing with the issue. No matter what the approach, it can no longer just be business as usual for the NFL.



Washington, DC based Debbie Hines is a trial lawyer and former prosecutor who has represented  many victims of domestic violence.

Judge Drops the Hammer on Michael Dunn at Sentencing

Friday, October 17th, 2014


DebbieDunnTrialTwo years and two trials later after Jordan Davis was murdered by Michael Dunn while sitting in a car with 3 of his teen age friends, Leland Brunson, Tommie Stornes and Tevin Thompson playing music, Michael Dunn was sentenced today.   And justice was finally served.  As some say using slang, the judge dropped the hammer on Michael Dunn.  Judge Russell Healey sentenced Dunn to a maximum of 30 years, (20 years minimum)   each   for the attempted murders on Jordan’s three friends which equates to a minimum 60 years and maximum 90 years ,  15 years concurrently for the use of a firearm and then  life without eligibility of parole  after serving those sentences for Jordan’s murder. While often the criminal justice system does not equally dispense justice when it comes to black victims or black defendants versus whites, this time justice was fairly dispensed.   Justice is not always fair for African Americans. In the Dunn trial, justice was fair today. He justly got what he deserved.


In a society where African Americans  cannot sit in a car playing music, walk in a gated community with candy and iced tea or seek help from strangers at night, without being shot to death,  there is something terribly wrong with our society. Mr. Dunn went from his son’s wedding, a joyous occasion to taking another person’s life on November 23, 2012. And Judge Healey addressed it, saying the Dunn case shows how society has lost its way and its “moral compass”.   Judge Healey in delivering the sentence tells Dunn, “Mr. Dunn your life is effectively over”.  And Judge Healey also addressed Florida’s Stand Your Ground laws upon which these types of defendants rely on to justify their killings.  Healey indicated that Stand Your Ground does not mean those like Mr. Dunn have a right to shoot and kill in these situations without a duty to retreat. The Florida law has been widely misinterpreted and used to justify unlawful killings.


Despite the harsh sentence given, for the family of Jordan Davis, nothing will ever be the same.  Victims of the family are allowed to address the court through victim impact statements or by testimony before the court.  The statements by the Davis family were heart wrenching for all those in court, including 5 jurors who came to the sentencing.  Ron Davis, Jordan’s father said his life as he knew it was shattered on November 23, 2012. His mother, Lucia McBath, stated that Jordan was named after the river Jordan in the Bible and prayed many prayers over his life that Jordan would be able to navigate a world with danger.  And yet, through it all, Jordan Davis’ mother states she chooses to forgive Dunn for taking her son’s life.


Michael Dunn has 30 days to appeal.   It’s a safe bet to say he will appeal.  He has nothing to lose. There were two trials since the first trial resulted in guilty verdicts of the three attempted murders and a hung jury or mistrial in the murder of Jordan Dunn.  On appeal, even if one appeal is unlikely successful, Dunn will likely remain in jail as the sentences run consecutively and not together.  And an appeal is not based on the fact that he is dissatisfied with his sentence handed down by the judge. It must be based on a legal error committed by the trial judge which affected the jury’s verdict and outcome of the trial.  The sentences are effectively a death sentence in jail for 47 year old Michael Dunn. The State’s Attorney stated the case did not meet the criteria for the death penalty. Even if it did, the family of Jordan Davis, a religious family, did not want the death penalty on religious reasons.


And so for this time, justice was served for the murder and attempted murders of African American teenagers just acting as teenagers in America.  And this time “Lady Justice” got it right.


Debbie Hines is a trial lawyer and former felony prosecutor who has tried murder cases. She often is seen in the media speaking on law, race and gender issues on BET, C-Span, Fox 5, NBC and CBS affiliates and TV One with Roland Martin.

Oscar Pistorius Asserts White Privilege During Sentencing

Wednesday, October 15th, 2014

Photo courte256px-Oscar_Pistorius_2_Daegu_2011sy Erik van Leeuwen


In many ways, the Oscar Pistorius trial has had very little parallels to the American justice system except in the sentencing phase, where Pistorius is asserting white privilege to avoid jail time. Pistorius was found guilty  of culpable homicide a parallel to manslaughter in America. He could receive up to 15 years in jail or as little as house arrest or community service.  Unlike in America, there is no jury system so the case instead was tried before Judge Thokozile Masipaone, one of the few  black judges in South Africa.  During the trial, Pistorius cried, sobbed and told how he loved Reeva Steenkamp and would not have killed her.   And now during the sentencing phase, entering into day three, the Pistorius  defense is asserting what he probably believes to  be his  rights as a white South African to avoid jail.


Prior to the killing of Reeva Steenkamp, Oscar Pistorius, known as the Blade Runner, for his running ability on artificial prosthetics,  fought for the right to be treated as an equal.  Prior to the killing of Reeva, Pistorius proclaimed that he did not want special preferential  treatment and earned the right to run competitively with nondisabled runners.  Ever since the death of Steenkamp, he has been singing a different tune.  During the trial, he practically blamed his disability as the reason for his overwhelming fear of intruders into his house on the February night that Steenkamp was killed.  He used his lack of lower limbs as the reason he felt vulnerable suspecting burglars in his home.  And now that he has been found guilty of a crime which carries a jail sentence, he has been relying on his disability as a way to keep him out of jail.  Pistorius never wanted to be treated differently due to his disability until now.  And none of the excuses that he has proffered through his defense team should be enough to keep him out of jail.


Since the sentencing hearing, Pistorius’ team and the probation officer hired by the defense has concocted a series of white privilege defenses.  A defense witness testified that he would be “broken as a person” if he were sent to jail. The probation officer who testified said he would be subject to violence and highly stressful conditions.  A jail is likely a highly stressful condition for anyone.  And in most jails, unfortunately there is often violence.  As for his disability, jails may not be fully handicap accessible for the blind, hearing impaired or physically disabled, yet that is not a reason to excuse a crime.   Jails are not just for the able bodied.  Jails and incarceration are for those who have committed a crime which justifies incarceration. Killing a person fits into that category.  As his defense team asserts that jail would have no beneficial effect on Pistorius, jails usually do not have a beneficial effect on most of those who are incarcerated.


The prosecution is seeking a lengthy sentence for the killing of Reeva Steenkamp.  It is not known how Pistorius’ white privilege defense will work.   In South Africa and America, the white wealthy or famous privilege defense seems to work in some cases.   In December, 2013, Ethan Couch,  a wealthy 16 year old teenager avoided jail for killing 4 people and severely injuring two others, as a result of drunk driving when he asserted what was being called the “affluenza” defense by his psychologist.  One man lost both his wife and daughter in the Couch  drunk driving collision.  Couch received probation after pleading guilty to manslaughter.  And  Alabama Judge Mark Fuller admitted to domestic violence of his wife by hitting her with a closed fist. He like NFL player Ray Rice received diversion. He will not have to admit guilt and his record will remain clean.


In the U.S. the prison population is over 50% African American and Hispanic males despite the fact that African American men make up roughly 6% of the overall population.  And the fact of the high concentration of minorities is not due to more crime being committed. It is due to the inherent prejudicial bias in the criminal justice system.  And in South Africa, the overwhelming prisoners in jail are black.  And one report states in relationship to whites and jail time, “Owing to the relatively greater incomes of the white and Indian populations and their greater levels of education… it might well be the case that they enjoyed a superior standard of legal representation than did the other two population groups, and could thus avoid jail.”  And that speaks volumes for Oscar Pistorius and his chances of getting no jail time for killing Reeva Steenkamp.




Debbie Hines is a trial lawyer in Washington, DC and former felony prosecutor.