Teen Says She And Other Juveniles Took Part in Fatal Beating of a Senior

By Jeff Levine - October 16, 2024
Daily Stories | Homicides | Juveniles | Suspects | Victims |

A 15-year-old girl described her part in kicking and beating an elderly man to death in testimony before DC Superior Court Judge Kendra Briggs on Oct. 15.  And she identified her alleged co-conspirators as willing participants. 

The teen is one of five co-defendants, girls aged 12-to-15 at the time of the crime, charged with first-degree murder and assault with a dangerous weapon for their alleged involvement in the fatal beating of 64-year-old Reggie Brown. 

The incident occurred late at night on Oct. 17, 2023, on the 6200 block of Georgia Avenue, NW. 

As the prosecution’s lead witness the teen claimed she suggested that a group of her girl acquaintances “find someone to beat up,” because they were bored. Then the juvenile said she along with her four co-defendants encountered Brown on Georgia Avenue and chased him down a back alley where she admitted, “I kicked him,” on the leg and in the torso.  

While she acknowledged that the prosecution didn’t promise her immunity, the juvenile had previously signed a plea agreement with undisclosed terms.

Wearing a black hooded scarf and testifying with an emotional support dog at her side, the teen answered many prosecutorial questions with just a “yes” or a “no,” avoiding eye contact with two co-defendants who were being tried.  

However, the most chilling moments of her hours on the witness stand came in narrating a cell phone video the prosecution says was taken by one of the suspects in the beating. 

As the prosecutor moved through the video the witness told of the group’s meeting up with an unknown man on Georgia Avenue in a blue jacket who was already in the process of beating Brown and suggested they join the attack.

“Can we help?” asked the witness of the man.

As the crime unfolded, two of the suspects hopped over a fence and allegedly jumped on Brown in his futile efforts to escape. The video depicts s a flurry of boots assailing Brown’s bloody head while he lies motionless on the ground.  In particular, the witness identified the shoes of one of the attackers she knew as “silvery and glittering”   

Prompted by the prosecutor she named her co-defendants as visible in the video taking part in the attack.

At that point, the witness said she knew something was wrong.  “I stepped back,” she said, unhappy with what was happening. However, the onslaught continued with squeals and laughs audible in the background and when it was over, two girls, identified as suspects, are seen in the frame appearing to celebrate.  

The witness realized that Brown was dead, “He stopped talking,” she said.  Brown was described as a man with multiple medical conditions who was missing several fingers.  None of the defendants apparently knew the victim. His family members excused themselves from the courtroom before the video was played.

In cross examination, Geoffrey Harris, who’s representing the 13-year-old defendant, argued that getting into a fight didn’t mean killing someone.

“That thought that somebody was going to die, that thought never crossed your mind,” said Harris. “Nobody was getting seriously hurt; no one was getting killed,” he continued, and the witness agreed. 

Earlier in the proceeding Charlotte Gilliland, who represents a 14-year-old defendant, argued unsuccessfully against admitting a series of text messages and social media posts as inadmissible hearsay. The prosecution says the information links the five suspects to the crime.

Among the electronic conversations is the question, “You want us to beat the s*** out of him?,  then “We going to jail.”  Another post presented to the court read, “We jumped SB but killed him accidentally.”

“There’s no mention of an incident…There’s no mention of committing a crime,” said Giilland.  

Gilliland also asked Judge Briggs to recuse herself from the case for a potential bias after having hearing evidence that culminated in plea deals for two of the defendants Gililland says is prejudicial to her client.

“In this set of circumstances, a reasonable person could conclude that there is an appearance of partiality,” said Gilliland referring to “prejudicial and criminalizing information,” presented to the judge.

Rejecting Gililland’s claim Judge Briggs said, “You knew that prior to making your opening statement.” 

Quoting precedent, Judge Briggs said, the judge will have presumed to rely on the admissible evidence.

The prosecution is slated to continue questioning the juvenile in future proceedings. The trial is scheduled to resume on Oct. 16.