Special Police Officer’s Testimony Disrupts Metro Stabbing Trial

By D.C. Witness Staff - November 12, 2024
Daily Stories | stabbing | Suspects | Uncategorized |

A Special Police Officer’s (SPO) testimony devolved into heated exchanges with DC Superior Court Judge Judith Pipe on Nov. 5. That following the opening of a trial for a stabbing at the Mount Vernon Metro station after a fight on the platform.

Samuel Robinson, 44, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon and possession of a prohibited weapon, allegedly committed during release from another criminal matter, for his alleged role in a stabbing at the Mount Vernon Square Metro Station on the 700 block of M Street, NW, on Feb. 6. One person sustained a wound to the back of the head.

Prosecutors outlined the incident, stating that it began when the victim, who is reportedly schizophrenic, got into an altercation with Robinson, grabbing him by the collar and pinning him against an elevator. After an SPO intervened to break up the initial confrontation, the victim became aggressive.. The situation escalated when Robinson allegedly drew a pocket knife, went after the victim, and slashed him in the back of the head.

The defense, led by attorney Michelle Lockhard, argues that Robinson acted in self-defense. They claim the victim initiated physical contact and maintained a threatening posture even after the SPO’s intervention. Lockhard contended that Robinson drew the knife in response to an ongoing threat to his safety, emphasizing that the SPO should have done more to stop the situation and protect Robinson.

The prosecution’s first witness, the SPO who responded to the incident, testified that she witnessed a fight near the station escalator upon arriving for her shift. She described seeing a bald man “yoking up” a man with dreadlocks and then asking them to stop.  After the parties separated, the victim became threatening. She emphasized that Robinson “did what he had to do to protect himself.”

During cross-examination, defense attorney Lockhard questioned why the armed officer didn’t intervene more forcefully. The SPO explained that their use-of-force protocol prioritizes the safety of all parties and that her role is to manage situations while awaiting Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) response.

The testimony was marked by frequent interruptions and heated exchanges between the witness and Judge Pipe, which led to the jury going into recess multiple times. The SPO repeatedly talked over Judge Pipe and the attorneys, refused to answer questions, and demanded to leave, visibly agitated with the proceedings. At points, the two were yelling at each other over what is expected of testifying witness. The testimony, which Judge Pipe said could be fifteen minutes, took over an hour. 

Parties are slated to reconvene Nov. 6.