Judge Allows ID Evidence in Stabbing Case

By Joseph Wolf - October 4, 2024
Daily Stories | stabbing | Suspects |

DC Superior Court Judge Heidi Pasichow denied a motion to suppress evidence in a stabbing defendant’s case at an Oct. 2 motion hearing.

Warnell Reams, 57, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon and obstruction of justice for his alleged involvement in a stabbing on June 5 on the 200 block of Vine Street, NW. One person sustained injuries.

According to court documents, Reams allegedly met the victim to get drugs. He returned sometime later to the scene because believed he was not given all the drugs he paid for. After an argument, Reams allegedly stabbed the victim twice in his left arm and once in the left side of his abdomen. 

Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officers went to the hospital so that the victim could identify the suspect. They used a photo array consisting of nine individuals. The victim picked out an individual he identified as the suspect, and called him by his nickname and legal name.

During the motion hearing, Reams’ defense attorney, Michelle Lockard, requested to suppress the identification on the grounds of due process, citing the procedures conducted by MPD were unnecessarily suggestive and unreliable.

According to Lockard, it was suggestive because, as the officer was holding the photo array, he had his thumb next to the suspect. 

She also said it was unreliable because the officer ad-libbed the instructions he gave to the victim about the procedure as opposed to precisely explaining it. She also argued the officer refused to let the victim look at the photo array again after identifying the suspect.

The prosecution objected arguing the approach was not unduly suggestive because the officer only rejected the request to see the photo array after the victim positively identified the suspect twice. 

The prosecutor further argued that it would have been impossible for the detective to point the victim toward a certain individual because Reams was not believed to be the suspect at the time.

Judge Pasichow denied the motion, arguing the line up is reliable due to the knowledge the victim had about the individual he picked out. Judge Pasichow also stated that there was nothing unduly suggestive about the process as a whole.

Parties are expected to return to court on Oct. 3.