Opening arguments got underway in a stabbing case before DC Superior Court Judge Andrea Hertzfeld on June 3.
Tavonte Graham, 33, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, assault with significant bodily injury, and attempted robbery for his alleged involvement in a stabbing and burglary on the 4100 block of Ames Street, NE, on Dec. 22, 2025. The victim sustained multiple stab wounds throughout his body.
Graham is also charged with possession of an open container of alcohol for his alleged involvement in a Jan. 16 incident,
In her opening statement, the prosecutor revealed that upon police arrival, the victim was found lying on the floor, wrapped in a blanket stained with blood, and screaming. He reported to police that an Amazon delivery driver had maced and stabbed him before attempting to rob his Louis Vuitton Timberland boots valued at over $1,000.
The prosecution also highlighted that, after questioning the victim, the lead detective conducted a photo confirmation procedure to determine that the suspect had a star tattoo on his face, which is said to match Graham.
When Graham was arrested for alleged the alcohol offense, prosecutors claimed police reportedly connected him to the stabbing through an open arrest warrant.
Graham’s attorney, Craig Ricard, challenged the prosecution’s argument by claiming the victim lacks credibility, noting that the his current narrative contrasts with his statement during police questioning.
The victim initially described the aggressor as an Amazon delivery driver who, upon arrival, immediately stabbed him. In reality, Ricard argued, the victim met Graham after matching on a dating app and personally invited him into his apartment.
Ricard emphasized that all information that the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) obtained about the stabbing was provided by only the victim, not the defendant. From the moment the incident occurred, Ricard alleged the victim demonstrated a pattern of deception by lying to the 911 dispatcher, lying to the officers when they arrived at the scene, and lying to the medical professionals who treated him about his relationship to the victim.
Given the what the defense says is a pattern of dishonesty, Ricard argued that the victim’s account should not be accepted at face value and that the jury lacked a reliable basis to accept his version of events as the truth.
The question of who actually initiated the violence on the night of the incident still remains, in the defense’s view, completely unanswered.
Witnesses will include the case’s lead MPD detective, officers who arrived at the crime scene, medical examiners, and the victim himself.
Parties are slated to reconvene on June 3.
