Two child homicides in Cleveland Park/Van Ness apartment buildings in eight days

[Anonymous]

I'm surprised he was not evicted and at least relocated after a felony assault on a fellow resident. They have made that process quicker.

Maybe the woman moved while he was locked up. I wouldn't be surprised if she was expressing concern about the kids.

Shame the USAO dropped the dv charges. A child would be alive today if they had.

[Anonymous]

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/dc/dc-police-investigating-death-of-a-child-northwest-dc-connecticut-ave-5-year-old/65-8727b028-2ddf-4cc1-b710-890e42be6ab1

For a PP to allege that the boy had no one who loved or cared for him but his murderer is SICK and ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chen supporting one made no difference, I did not vote for Frumin but this is so far beyond him. Cheh’s comments outside Days Inn did likely bump her from office. Predates him by at least a decade+. Chen even got social workers put in Sedgwick Gardens for a time, voucher tenants did not engage. Without the threat of losing the voucher, no effective curbs on behavior. Public housing you can be kicked out and banned. With vouchers, crime, you get moved from Sedgwick Gardens to Brandywine. Do not pay your share, move from Brandywine to Saratoga or Connecticut House.

Truth

But Frump owns it now. He has been negligent or worse on this issue, and it's the vulnerable poor children in these families who are suffering the most

It's not about how the rent is paid but about how children are not protected from known to be violent men. Had they lived in public housing in SE, poor DeAndre would be just as dead.

Frumin is on the housing committee. Still, press him to address CPS laxity and to push USAO to protect women and kids from violent men.

If the children were homeless or in public housing still would not help them. I get that you hate Frumin and I'm not a fan, but your focus on housing is not going to help kids like DeAndre.

Violent men do not need "services" that they are not even required to participate in. They need to be REMOVED FROM THE COMMUNITY.

I wonder about this. One of the consequences of “equity” and sending voucher recipients to Ward 3 is that communities are broken up. Maybe if these kids were in Anacostia the neighborhood church ladies would have looked out for them. Or the school more attuned to signs of abuse and less scared of being labeled “Karens.” Or even relatives around to check in.

This is despicable derailing nonsense. Plenty of toddlers and children are being terrorized across DC and anyone with half a brain can come up with two dozen reasons why “sending voucher recipients to Ward 3” would actually help the respective families get the services (including MPD attention) they need to find a way out of their horror. But on balance, vouchers had nothing to do with this. Stop exploiting the deaths of two children to advocate for push your own pet policy preferences, which seem to almost exclusively serve the goal of keeping all the dysfunction in DC sequestered in EOTR neighborhoods.

Vouchers have everything to do with the blight and crime that have be fallen the Connecticut Ave corridor. It’s you who are using the death of these poor kids to stifle an uncomfortable conversation. The city has had years to fix this. Time is up.

So you are solely focused on what impacts you and not failures by USAO and CFS that have directly led to the brutal deaths of many kids in DC? Your priority is to highjack focus on dead kids to focus on where they were when killed? Journee was a MD resident. If they died elsewhere, no prob?

There have been dozens of threads on here about vouchers, even more community meetings and hearings. Stifled?

Their deaths were not due to housing. Letting USAO and CFS skate, stifling THAT life and death discussion because you think it will never impact you, when these kids are barely cold is something.

I was also surprised 911 answered promptly and sent help to the correct address, not a given, and hasn’t been for many years.

Well I’ll play your game.

Dad applies for voucher.
Dad gets denied voucher.
Dad cannot house his children.
CPS takes children away and puts into foster care.
Dad does not murder his child.


It’s actually quite easy to see how the voucher plays in here.

We can agree to disagree on whether vouchers are appropriate in well established buildings where families and elderly live. For the record, I don’t think they are. Mixing violent criminals with children and elderly is never a good idea.

And we both agree that the DC child welfare system is wholly inadequate.

Let’s see what we can do with this logic . . .

1. Protected bike lanes are built on CT Ave, as was previously decided many moons ago by DDOT

2. Families living along CT Ave have an safe alternative to using their vehicles to run errands in the neighborhood and around NW DC

3. Deandre Pettus is not reliant on his car for running errands etc.

4. Deandre doesn’t suffer the frustration of being immobilized due to a flat car battery and so never gets angry that morning.

5. Deandre Pettus doesn’t beat his son to death.

You might find the assumptions underlying this hypothetical chain of events to be ridiculous, but those assumptions are no less so than your own.

Just like you don’t see bicycle safety advocates exploiting the deaths of these two children to call out the NIMBYs for blocking the CT Ave bike lane, you should similarly exhibit a modicum of decency and refrain from trying to make stupid arguments about how the tragic deaths of these two children were caused by DC residents using housing vouchers to move to Upper NW.

What a hilarious self-own from a typically ghoulish GGWash mouth-breather.

Predictably, you lack the self-awareness to realize that it is your own self-centered non-sensical arguments that are in fact being taken to the cleaners.

Says the person who has -- in the guise of a hypothetical -- inserted their demand for bike lanes into discussion of the killing of a young child by a parent.

Please seek help. You're sick.

You - and/or your ilk - have been demanding for pages that Frumin put a pause on the use of housing vouchers in Ward 3. Those demands are apparently serious.

Since you apparently can’t figure it out for yourself, I’ll have to spell it out for you. No one is making a serious argument that the deaths of the children were due to a lack of bike lanes. That would be ridiculous.

What they are showing is that the logic of tying these deaths to the voucher program is just as ridiculous and just as offensive.

I trust that you now understand how sick it is to exploit these deaths for pet causes.

The voucher program brought violent criminals—like a man who could kill his own child—into the building where I lived with my family. It doesn’t affect someone like Frumin, so he’s glad it happened.

People like you have contempt for regular working families, so you’re glad it happened too.

Making an argument that vouchers given to others reduces your quality of life is a fine argument.

But it’s a very different argument than one that suggests that vouchers resulted in the kid being killed.

I don’t take issue with your opposition to vouchers housing people in your neighborhood.

But to exploit the death of a child to try to make your life better - which distracts from the factors that actually contributed to his death - is sick.

I’m not sure what part of this you fail to understand. Vouchers helped cause this. DC, by pushing housing of the most vulnerable to the private sector and removing oversight, and at the same time removing the private sector’s legal ability to exercise its own oversight, created unsafe an chaotic housing conditions that led directly to this. DC decided that equity (in the form of sn above market voucher system) was more important than safety.

You’ve constructed an elaborate scenario to confirm an obsessive against voucher holders in NW that you held well before this tragic incident. That scenario is based on complete nonsense. You have absolutely no understanding of the life of this family or any other families that benefit from vouchers. Your prognostications of what would have happened in the absence of being extended a housing voucher are pulled straight from a place where the sun don’t shine. You are an embarrassment to discourse. Please stop.

It’s not “elaborate” to anyone but you.

Elaborate was kind. Utter bullshit is more accurate.

I don’t know how you sleep at night with the knowledge that you exploit the deaths of dead kids to keep voucher recipients out of your neighborhood.

I left the neighborhood because I could t sleep at night in it as my building descended into crime and chaos. I don’t know how you, Frumin, Bowser eta all can think it is right to inflict that on people.

I don’t see anyone on here defending the way the voucher program is being run.

But do you really need to use the violent deaths of two innocent children to draw attention to your specific problems?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those very young kids have had a lot of exposure to violence.

Per Housing First/HUD guidelines, even committing a crime in the apartment does not necessarily result in the loss of the voucher. The prior felony DV charge took place in same apt in Connecticut House. CPS should have been keeping an eye on those kids, so foreseeable that this violent man could harm them. The argument with the girlfriend was said to be about the kids, likely re: his treatment of them. So he punched her in the mouth and threatened to shoot her. Other residents have stay away orders against him. The kids were defenseless.

Hope the girls are with someone safe.

Now, all 650 students at their school have also had exposure to the kind of violence families worked hard to earn the money to move to this part of the city to avoid. Truth.

The irony is that the government seemed to have believed that moving violent people into safe neighborhoods would magically make their lives better, but the reality is that everyone's lives are worse now. No one wants violence to happen. And also, no one wants to live in a place where women are thrown out of windows and babies are murdered by their parents. Moving people around doesn't substitute for mental health, social services, and a strong criminal justice system.

Spreading the problem adults around doesn't fix the problem, it just makes it a more widespread problem and thins out scare government resources in every area of the city.

Your three paragraphs reduce neatly to, “I want my safe little Upper NW cocoon back!”

I didn’t think I’d ever encounter the argument that ghettoes are the solution to urban violence, but you’ve yet again set a new bar for nonsense-on-DCUM.

I can’t see a lot of good coming out of this horrific event, but I still hope that having it happen so close to you may, just maybe, inspire you to hold the DC mayor and Council accountable for the disastrous performance of CFSA and other institutions that serve populations less fortunate than yourself.

No, that's not what I'm saying. Save your outrage. Read better.

It is what you are saying. Here, I’ll explain it to you.

You say:

The irony is that the government seemed to have believed that moving violent people into safe neighborhoods would magically make their lives better, but the reality is that everyone's lives are worse now.

You are complaining that vouchers have made life in your neighborhood worse for you. That may be the case, but it’s a massive stretch to argue that the lives of voucher recipients are worse off.

And also, no one wants to live in a place where women are thrown out of windows and babies are murdered by their parents.

But it’s OK if these things happen in another part of the city? Because they would have and, in fact, do on a regular basis.

Spreading the problem adults around doesn't fix the problem, it just makes it a more widespread problem and thins out scare government resources in every area of the city.

. . . which leads us to the corollary that those receiving voucher recipients would be better off - because they could more efficiently receive services - if they were all clustered together in one part of the city, that is, in a ghetto.

If I’m missing something here, please enlighten us as to what you really meant. I really don’t want to believe that there are people who seriously advocate ghettoization in 2024.

A 5 year old is DEAD because his father was handed a no-strings-attached housing voucher instead of being subjected to oversight like he should have been. It’s only you who are stigmatizing all-black neighborhoods as “ghettos.” What that family needed was intensive social services and eyes on them. Instead they got a NW voucher because “equity” was the most important value.

The failure to prosecute him for felony dev was fed USAO which DC has no control over.

Reunification and ending supervision too soon was CFSA, controlled by DC with Council oversight.

CFSA oversight is not part of Housing First. CFSA has oversight over all families in all types of housing, here their colossal failure resulted in another death. The argument used to be too many kids were removed, the pendulum has swung too far and needs course correction.

If concerned about kids, consider becoming certified as a foster parent, there are not nearly enough.

This guy NEVER should have been given a no-strings-attached voucher.

He will likely have that PSH voucher waiting should he ever be prosecuted, returning citizens are given preference. Kids or no kids.

What he should never have been given is custody. Too many kids are being left in harms way. And for those claiming a shelter is better, sure did not help Relisha Rudd.

It is highly likely that he was the only person in the immediate family that agreed to care for them. So foster care or dad.

The police chief referred to a mother and grandmother. Often violent men seek and get full custody as a final twist of the knife to the mom.

Look that is wrong information. That does not describe this situation. And the grandmother is the dads mother.

Hopefully the mom or either grandmother or someone in the family can provide a stable home for the girls. May they never be returned to DeAndre Pettus. If extended family far from DC would be able to do so, distance may offer additional protection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chen supporting one made no difference, I did not vote for Frumin but this is so far beyond him. Cheh’s comments outside Days Inn did likely bump her from office. Predates him by at least a decade+. Chen even got social workers put in Sedgwick Gardens for a time, voucher tenants did not engage. Without the threat of losing the voucher, no effective curbs on behavior. Public housing you can be kicked out and banned. With vouchers, crime, you get moved from Sedgwick Gardens to Brandywine. Do not pay your share, move from Brandywine to Saratoga or Connecticut House.

Truth

But Frump owns it now. He has been negligent or worse on this issue, and it's the vulnerable poor children in these families who are suffering the most

It's not about how the rent is paid but about how children are not protected from known to be violent men. Had they lived in public housing in SE, poor DeAndre would be just as dead.

Frumin is on the housing committee. Still, press him to address CPS laxity and to push USAO to protect women and kids from violent men.

If the children were homeless or in public housing still would not help them. I get that you hate Frumin and I'm not a fan, but your focus on housing is not going to help kids like DeAndre.

Violent men do not need "services" that they are not even required to participate in. They need to be REMOVED FROM THE COMMUNITY.

I wonder about this. One of the consequences of “equity” and sending voucher recipients to Ward 3 is that communities are broken up. Maybe if these kids were in Anacostia the neighborhood church ladies would have looked out for them. Or the school more attuned to signs of abuse and less scared of being labeled “Karens.” Or even relatives around to check in.

This is despicable derailing nonsense. Plenty of toddlers and children are being terrorized across DC and anyone with half a brain can come up with two dozen reasons why “sending voucher recipients to Ward 3” would actually help the respective families get the services (including MPD attention) they need to find a way out of their horror. But on balance, vouchers had nothing to do with this. Stop exploiting the deaths of two children to advocate for push your own pet policy preferences, which seem to almost exclusively serve the goal of keeping all the dysfunction in DC sequestered in EOTR neighborhoods.

Vouchers have everything to do with the blight and crime that have be fallen the Connecticut Ave corridor. It’s you who are using the death of these poor kids to stifle an uncomfortable conversation. The city has had years to fix this. Time is up.

So you are solely focused on what impacts you and not failures by USAO and CFS that have directly led to the brutal deaths of many kids in DC? Your priority is to highjack focus on dead kids to focus on where they were when killed? Journee was a MD resident. If they died elsewhere, no prob?

There have been dozens of threads on here about vouchers, even more community meetings and hearings. Stifled?

Their deaths were not due to housing. Letting USAO and CFS skate, stifling THAT life and death discussion because you think it will never impact you, when these kids are barely cold is something.

I was also surprised 911 answered promptly and sent help to the correct address, not a given, and hasn’t been for many years.

Well I’ll play your game.

Dad applies for voucher.
Dad gets denied voucher.
Dad cannot house his children.
CPS takes children away and puts into foster care.
Dad does not murder his child.


It’s actually quite easy to see how the voucher plays in here.

We can agree to disagree on whether vouchers are appropriate in well established buildings where families and elderly live. For the record, I don’t think they are. Mixing violent criminals with children and elderly is never a good idea.

And we both agree that the DC child welfare system is wholly inadequate.

Let’s see what we can do with this logic . . .

1. Protected bike lanes are built on CT Ave, as was previously decided many moons ago by DDOT

2. Families living along CT Ave have an safe alternative to using their vehicles to run errands in the neighborhood and around NW DC

3. Deandre Pettus is not reliant on his car for running errands etc.

4. Deandre doesn’t suffer the frustration of being immobilized due to a flat car battery and so never gets angry that morning.

5. Deandre Pettus doesn’t beat his son to death.

You might find the assumptions underlying this hypothetical chain of events to be ridiculous, but those assumptions are no less so than your own.

Just like you don’t see bicycle safety advocates exploiting the deaths of these two children to call out the NIMBYs for blocking the CT Ave bike lane, you should similarly exhibit a modicum of decency and refrain from trying to make stupid arguments about how the tragic deaths of these two children were caused by DC residents using housing vouchers to move to Upper NW.

What a hilarious self-own from a typically ghoulish GGWash mouth-breather.

Predictably, you lack the self-awareness to realize that it is your own self-centered non-sensical arguments that are in fact being taken to the cleaners.

Says the person who has -- in the guise of a hypothetical -- inserted their demand for bike lanes into discussion of the killing of a young child by a parent.

Please seek help. You're sick.

You - and/or your ilk - have been demanding for pages that Frumin put a pause on the use of housing vouchers in Ward 3. Those demands are apparently serious.

Since you apparently can’t figure it out for yourself, I’ll have to spell it out for you. No one is making a serious argument that the deaths of the children were due to a lack of bike lanes. That would be ridiculous.

What they are showing is that the logic of tying these deaths to the voucher program is just as ridiculous and just as offensive.

I trust that you now understand how sick it is to exploit these deaths for pet causes.

The voucher program brought violent criminals—like a man who could kill his own child—into the building where I lived with my family. It doesn’t affect someone like Frumin, so he’s glad it happened.

People like you have contempt for regular working families, so you’re glad it happened too.

Making an argument that vouchers given to others reduces your quality of life is a fine argument.

But it’s a very different argument than one that suggests that vouchers resulted in the kid being killed.

I don’t take issue with your opposition to vouchers housing people in your neighborhood.

But to exploit the death of a child to try to make your life better - which distracts from the factors that actually contributed to his death - is sick.

I’m not sure what part of this you fail to understand. Vouchers helped cause this. DC, by pushing housing of the most vulnerable to the private sector and removing oversight, and at the same time removing the private sector’s legal ability to exercise its own oversight, created unsafe an chaotic housing conditions that led directly to this. DC decided that equity (in the form of sn above market voucher system) was more important than safety.

You’ve constructed an elaborate scenario to confirm an obsessive against voucher holders in NW that you held well before this tragic incident. That scenario is based on complete nonsense. You have absolutely no understanding of the life of this family or any other families that benefit from vouchers. Your prognostications of what would have happened in the absence of being extended a housing voucher are pulled straight from a place where the sun don’t shine. You are an embarrassment to discourse. Please stop.

It’s not “elaborate” to anyone but you.

Elaborate was kind. Utter bullshit is more accurate.

I don’t know how you sleep at night with the knowledge that you exploit the deaths of dead kids to keep voucher recipients out of your neighborhood.

I left the neighborhood because I could t sleep at night in it as my building descended into crime and chaos. I don’t know how you, Frumin, Bowser eta all can think it is right to inflict that on people.

I don’t see anyone on here defending the way the voucher program is being run.

But do you really need to use the violent deaths of two innocent children to draw attention to your specific problems?

I'm not using the deaths of two innocent children to do anything. Sorry that the voucher program is such an ongoing never-ending disaster that you want to forbid discussion of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chen supporting one made no difference, I did not vote for Frumin but this is so far beyond him. Cheh’s comments outside Days Inn did likely bump her from office. Predates him by at least a decade+. Chen even got social workers put in Sedgwick Gardens for a time, voucher tenants did not engage. Without the threat of losing the voucher, no effective curbs on behavior. Public housing you can be kicked out and banned. With vouchers, crime, you get moved from Sedgwick Gardens to Brandywine. Do not pay your share, move from Brandywine to Saratoga or Connecticut House.

Truth

But Frump owns it now. He has been negligent or worse on this issue, and it's the vulnerable poor children in these families who are suffering the most

It's not about how the rent is paid but about how children are not protected from known to be violent men. Had they lived in public housing in SE, poor DeAndre would be just as dead.

Frumin is on the housing committee. Still, press him to address CPS laxity and to push USAO to protect women and kids from violent men.

If the children were homeless or in public housing still would not help them. I get that you hate Frumin and I'm not a fan, but your focus on housing is not going to help kids like DeAndre.

Violent men do not need "services" that they are not even required to participate in. They need to be REMOVED FROM THE COMMUNITY.

I wonder about this. One of the consequences of “equity” and sending voucher recipients to Ward 3 is that communities are broken up. Maybe if these kids were in Anacostia the neighborhood church ladies would have looked out for them. Or the school more attuned to signs of abuse and less scared of being labeled “Karens.” Or even relatives around to check in.

This is despicable derailing nonsense. Plenty of toddlers and children are being terrorized across DC and anyone with half a brain can come up with two dozen reasons why “sending voucher recipients to Ward 3” would actually help the respective families get the services (including MPD attention) they need to find a way out of their horror. But on balance, vouchers had nothing to do with this. Stop exploiting the deaths of two children to advocate for push your own pet policy preferences, which seem to almost exclusively serve the goal of keeping all the dysfunction in DC sequestered in EOTR neighborhoods.

Vouchers have everything to do with the blight and crime that have be fallen the Connecticut Ave corridor. It’s you who are using the death of these poor kids to stifle an uncomfortable conversation. The city has had years to fix this. Time is up.

So you are solely focused on what impacts you and not failures by USAO and CFS that have directly led to the brutal deaths of many kids in DC? Your priority is to highjack focus on dead kids to focus on where they were when killed? Journee was a MD resident. If they died elsewhere, no prob?

There have been dozens of threads on here about vouchers, even more community meetings and hearings. Stifled?

Their deaths were not due to housing. Letting USAO and CFS skate, stifling THAT life and death discussion because you think it will never impact you, when these kids are barely cold is something.

I was also surprised 911 answered promptly and sent help to the correct address, not a given, and hasn’t been for many years.

Well I’ll play your game.

Dad applies for voucher.
Dad gets denied voucher.
Dad cannot house his children.
CPS takes children away and puts into foster care.
Dad does not murder his child.


It’s actually quite easy to see how the voucher plays in here.

We can agree to disagree on whether vouchers are appropriate in well established buildings where families and elderly live. For the record, I don’t think they are. Mixing violent criminals with children and elderly is never a good idea.

And we both agree that the DC child welfare system is wholly inadequate.

Let’s see what we can do with this logic . . .

1. Protected bike lanes are built on CT Ave, as was previously decided many moons ago by DDOT

2. Families living along CT Ave have an safe alternative to using their vehicles to run errands in the neighborhood and around NW DC

3. Deandre Pettus is not reliant on his car for running errands etc.

4. Deandre doesn’t suffer the frustration of being immobilized due to a flat car battery and so never gets angry that morning.

5. Deandre Pettus doesn’t beat his son to death.

You might find the assumptions underlying this hypothetical chain of events to be ridiculous, but those assumptions are no less so than your own.

Just like you don’t see bicycle safety advocates exploiting the deaths of these two children to call out the NIMBYs for blocking the CT Ave bike lane, you should similarly exhibit a modicum of decency and refrain from trying to make stupid arguments about how the tragic deaths of these two children were caused by DC residents using housing vouchers to move to Upper NW.

What a hilarious self-own from a typically ghoulish GGWash mouth-breather.

Predictably, you lack the self-awareness to realize that it is your own self-centered non-sensical arguments that are in fact being taken to the cleaners.

Says the person who has -- in the guise of a hypothetical -- inserted their demand for bike lanes into discussion of the killing of a young child by a parent.

Please seek help. You're sick.

You - and/or your ilk - have been demanding for pages that Frumin put a pause on the use of housing vouchers in Ward 3. Those demands are apparently serious.

Since you apparently can’t figure it out for yourself, I’ll have to spell it out for you. No one is making a serious argument that the deaths of the children were due to a lack of bike lanes. That would be ridiculous.

What they are showing is that the logic of tying these deaths to the voucher program is just as ridiculous and just as offensive.

I trust that you now understand how sick it is to exploit these deaths for pet causes.

The voucher program brought violent criminals—like a man who could kill his own child—into the building where I lived with my family. It doesn’t affect someone like Frumin, so he’s glad it happened.

People like you have contempt for regular working families, so you’re glad it happened too.

Making an argument that vouchers given to others reduces your quality of life is a fine argument.

But it’s a very different argument than one that suggests that vouchers resulted in the kid being killed.

I don’t take issue with your opposition to vouchers housing people in your neighborhood.

But to exploit the death of a child to try to make your life better - which distracts from the factors that actually contributed to his death - is sick.

I’m not sure what part of this you fail to understand. Vouchers helped cause this. DC, by pushing housing of the most vulnerable to the private sector and removing oversight, and at the same time removing the private sector’s legal ability to exercise its own oversight, created unsafe an chaotic housing conditions that led directly to this. DC decided that equity (in the form of sn above market voucher system) was more important than safety.

You’ve constructed an elaborate scenario to confirm an obsessive against voucher holders in NW that you held well before this tragic incident. That scenario is based on complete nonsense. You have absolutely no understanding of the life of this family or any other families that benefit from vouchers. Your prognostications of what would have happened in the absence of being extended a housing voucher are pulled straight from a place where the sun don’t shine. You are an embarrassment to discourse. Please stop.

It’s not “elaborate” to anyone but you.

Elaborate was kind. Utter bullshit is more accurate.

I don’t know how you sleep at night with the knowledge that you exploit the deaths of dead kids to keep voucher recipients out of your neighborhood.

I left the neighborhood because I could t sleep at night in it as my building descended into crime and chaos. I don’t know how you, Frumin, Bowser eta all can think it is right to inflict that on people.

I don’t see anyone on here defending the way the voucher program is being run.

But do you really need to use the violent deaths of two innocent children to draw attention to your specific problems?

I'm not using the deaths of two innocent children to do anything. Sorry that the voucher program is such an ongoing never-ending disaster that you want to forbid discussion of it.

Not forbidding anything. Just calling you (and maybe others) who exhibit shameless and appalling levels of self-centeredness.

[Anonymous]

DP, I have personally attended dozens of community meetings, Council hearings etc. trying to push back on the program, over many years. I am not a fan or proponent.

2 dead young kids deserve a thread focused on them. Little is known about Journee but it's clear that USAO and CFS failed to protect DeAndre, repeatedly. That directly contributed to his death at the hands of his father. It was not a housing issue per se. Making the thread about how the voucher program has impacted me, or you, is a disservice to them. And allows USAO and CFS (which DC has complete control and oversight over) to continue practices and policies that may result in more child deaths. The safety of DeAndre's sisters continues to be in question when the killer of a 5 year old with his BARE HANDS is not even wearing a GPS monitor.

Here is a housing/voucher focused thread. It may particularly be of interest to those new to the issue.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113541.page#27392796

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chen supporting one made no difference, I did not vote for Frumin but this is so far beyond him. Cheh’s comments outside Days Inn did likely bump her from office. Predates him by at least a decade+. Chen even got social workers put in Sedgwick Gardens for a time, voucher tenants did not engage. Without the threat of losing the voucher, no effective curbs on behavior. Public housing you can be kicked out and banned. With vouchers, crime, you get moved from Sedgwick Gardens to Brandywine. Do not pay your share, move from Brandywine to Saratoga or Connecticut House.

Truth

But Frump owns it now. He has been negligent or worse on this issue, and it's the vulnerable poor children in these families who are suffering the most

It's not about how the rent is paid but about how children are not protected from known to be violent men. Had they lived in public housing in SE, poor DeAndre would be just as dead.

Frumin is on the housing committee. Still, press him to address CPS laxity and to push USAO to protect women and kids from violent men.

If the children were homeless or in public housing still would not help them. I get that you hate Frumin and I'm not a fan, but your focus on housing is not going to help kids like DeAndre.

Violent men do not need "services" that they are not even required to participate in. They need to be REMOVED FROM THE COMMUNITY.

I wonder about this. One of the consequences of “equity” and sending voucher recipients to Ward 3 is that communities are broken up. Maybe if these kids were in Anacostia the neighborhood church ladies would have looked out for them. Or the school more attuned to signs of abuse and less scared of being labeled “Karens.” Or even relatives around to check in.

This is despicable derailing nonsense. Plenty of toddlers and children are being terrorized across DC and anyone with half a brain can come up with two dozen reasons why “sending voucher recipients to Ward 3” would actually help the respective families get the services (including MPD attention) they need to find a way out of their horror. But on balance, vouchers had nothing to do with this. Stop exploiting the deaths of two children to advocate for push your own pet policy preferences, which seem to almost exclusively serve the goal of keeping all the dysfunction in DC sequestered in EOTR neighborhoods.

Vouchers have everything to do with the blight and crime that have be fallen the Connecticut Ave corridor. It’s you who are using the death of these poor kids to stifle an uncomfortable conversation. The city has had years to fix this. Time is up.

So you are solely focused on what impacts you and not failures by USAO and CFS that have directly led to the brutal deaths of many kids in DC? Your priority is to highjack focus on dead kids to focus on where they were when killed? Journee was a MD resident. If they died elsewhere, no prob?

There have been dozens of threads on here about vouchers, even more community meetings and hearings. Stifled?

Their deaths were not due to housing. Letting USAO and CFS skate, stifling THAT life and death discussion because you think it will never impact you, when these kids are barely cold is something.

I was also surprised 911 answered promptly and sent help to the correct address, not a given, and hasn’t been for many years.

Well I’ll play your game.

Dad applies for voucher.
Dad gets denied voucher.
Dad cannot house his children.
CPS takes children away and puts into foster care.
Dad does not murder his child.


It’s actually quite easy to see how the voucher plays in here.

We can agree to disagree on whether vouchers are appropriate in well established buildings where families and elderly live. For the record, I don’t think they are. Mixing violent criminals with children and elderly is never a good idea.

And we both agree that the DC child welfare system is wholly inadequate.

Let’s see what we can do with this logic . . .

1. Protected bike lanes are built on CT Ave, as was previously decided many moons ago by DDOT

2. Families living along CT Ave have an safe alternative to using their vehicles to run errands in the neighborhood and around NW DC

3. Deandre Pettus is not reliant on his car for running errands etc.

4. Deandre doesn’t suffer the frustration of being immobilized due to a flat car battery and so never gets angry that morning.

5. Deandre Pettus doesn’t beat his son to death.

You might find the assumptions underlying this hypothetical chain of events to be ridiculous, but those assumptions are no less so than your own.

Just like you don’t see bicycle safety advocates exploiting the deaths of these two children to call out the NIMBYs for blocking the CT Ave bike lane, you should similarly exhibit a modicum of decency and refrain from trying to make stupid arguments about how the tragic deaths of these two children were caused by DC residents using housing vouchers to move to Upper NW.

What a hilarious self-own from a typically ghoulish GGWash mouth-breather.

Predictably, you lack the self-awareness to realize that it is your own self-centered non-sensical arguments that are in fact being taken to the cleaners.

Says the person who has -- in the guise of a hypothetical -- inserted their demand for bike lanes into discussion of the killing of a young child by a parent.

Please seek help. You're sick.

You - and/or your ilk - have been demanding for pages that Frumin put a pause on the use of housing vouchers in Ward 3. Those demands are apparently serious.

Since you apparently can’t figure it out for yourself, I’ll have to spell it out for you. No one is making a serious argument that the deaths of the children were due to a lack of bike lanes. That would be ridiculous.

What they are showing is that the logic of tying these deaths to the voucher program is just as ridiculous and just as offensive.

I trust that you now understand how sick it is to exploit these deaths for pet causes.

The voucher program brought violent criminals—like a man who could kill his own child—into the building where I lived with my family. It doesn’t affect someone like Frumin, so he’s glad it happened.

People like you have contempt for regular working families, so you’re glad it happened too.

Making an argument that vouchers given to others reduces your quality of life is a fine argument.

But it’s a very different argument than one that suggests that vouchers resulted in the kid being killed.

I don’t take issue with your opposition to vouchers housing people in your neighborhood.

But to exploit the death of a child to try to make your life better - which distracts from the factors that actually contributed to his death - is sick.

I’m not sure what part of this you fail to understand. Vouchers helped cause this. DC, by pushing housing of the most vulnerable to the private sector and removing oversight, and at the same time removing the private sector’s legal ability to exercise its own oversight, created unsafe an chaotic housing conditions that led directly to this. DC decided that equity (in the form of sn above market voucher system) was more important than safety.

You’ve constructed an elaborate scenario to confirm an obsessive against voucher holders in NW that you held well before this tragic incident. That scenario is based on complete nonsense. You have absolutely no understanding of the life of this family or any other families that benefit from vouchers. Your prognostications of what would have happened in the absence of being extended a housing voucher are pulled straight from a place where the sun don’t shine. You are an embarrassment to discourse. Please stop.

It’s not “elaborate” to anyone but you.

Elaborate was kind. Utter bullshit is more accurate.

I don’t know how you sleep at night with the knowledge that you exploit the deaths of dead kids to keep voucher recipients out of your neighborhood.

I left the neighborhood because I could t sleep at night in it as my building descended into crime and chaos. I don’t know how you, Frumin, Bowser eta all can think it is right to inflict that on people.

I don’t see anyone on here defending the way the voucher program is being run.

But do you really need to use the violent deaths of two innocent children to draw attention to your specific problems?

I'm not using the deaths of two innocent children to do anything. Sorry that the voucher program is such an ongoing never-ending disaster that you want to forbid discussion of it.

+1. Typical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chen supporting one made no difference, I did not vote for Frumin but this is so far beyond him. Cheh’s comments outside Days Inn did likely bump her from office. Predates him by at least a decade+. Chen even got social workers put in Sedgwick Gardens for a time, voucher tenants did not engage. Without the threat of losing the voucher, no effective curbs on behavior. Public housing you can be kicked out and banned. With vouchers, crime, you get moved from Sedgwick Gardens to Brandywine. Do not pay your share, move from Brandywine to Saratoga or Connecticut House.

Truth

But Frump owns it now. He has been negligent or worse on this issue, and it's the vulnerable poor children in these families who are suffering the most

It's not about how the rent is paid but about how children are not protected from known to be violent men. Had they lived in public housing in SE, poor DeAndre would be just as dead.

Frumin is on the housing committee. Still, press him to address CPS laxity and to push USAO to protect women and kids from violent men.

If the children were homeless or in public housing still would not help them. I get that you hate Frumin and I'm not a fan, but your focus on housing is not going to help kids like DeAndre.

Violent men do not need "services" that they are not even required to participate in. They need to be REMOVED FROM THE COMMUNITY.

I wonder about this. One of the consequences of “equity” and sending voucher recipients to Ward 3 is that communities are broken up. Maybe if these kids were in Anacostia the neighborhood church ladies would have looked out for them. Or the school more attuned to signs of abuse and less scared of being labeled “Karens.” Or even relatives around to check in.

This is despicable derailing nonsense. Plenty of toddlers and children are being terrorized across DC and anyone with half a brain can come up with two dozen reasons why “sending voucher recipients to Ward 3” would actually help the respective families get the services (including MPD attention) they need to find a way out of their horror. But on balance, vouchers had nothing to do with this. Stop exploiting the deaths of two children to advocate for push your own pet policy preferences, which seem to almost exclusively serve the goal of keeping all the dysfunction in DC sequestered in EOTR neighborhoods.

Vouchers have everything to do with the blight and crime that have be fallen the Connecticut Ave corridor. It’s you who are using the death of these poor kids to stifle an uncomfortable conversation. The city has had years to fix this. Time is up.

So you are solely focused on what impacts you and not failures by USAO and CFS that have directly led to the brutal deaths of many kids in DC? Your priority is to highjack focus on dead kids to focus on where they were when killed? Journee was a MD resident. If they died elsewhere, no prob?

There have been dozens of threads on here about vouchers, even more community meetings and hearings. Stifled?

Their deaths were not due to housing. Letting USAO and CFS skate, stifling THAT life and death discussion because you think it will never impact you, when these kids are barely cold is something.

I was also surprised 911 answered promptly and sent help to the correct address, not a given, and hasn’t been for many years.

Well I’ll play your game.

Dad applies for voucher.
Dad gets denied voucher.
Dad cannot house his children.
CPS takes children away and puts into foster care.
Dad does not murder his child.


It’s actually quite easy to see how the voucher plays in here.

We can agree to disagree on whether vouchers are appropriate in well established buildings where families and elderly live. For the record, I don’t think they are. Mixing violent criminals with children and elderly is never a good idea.

And we both agree that the DC child welfare system is wholly inadequate.

Let’s see what we can do with this logic . . .

1. Protected bike lanes are built on CT Ave, as was previously decided many moons ago by DDOT

2. Families living along CT Ave have an safe alternative to using their vehicles to run errands in the neighborhood and around NW DC

3. Deandre Pettus is not reliant on his car for running errands etc.

4. Deandre doesn’t suffer the frustration of being immobilized due to a flat car battery and so never gets angry that morning.

5. Deandre Pettus doesn’t beat his son to death.

You might find the assumptions underlying this hypothetical chain of events to be ridiculous, but those assumptions are no less so than your own.

Just like you don’t see bicycle safety advocates exploiting the deaths of these two children to call out the NIMBYs for blocking the CT Ave bike lane, you should similarly exhibit a modicum of decency and refrain from trying to make stupid arguments about how the tragic deaths of these two children were caused by DC residents using housing vouchers to move to Upper NW.

What a hilarious self-own from a typically ghoulish GGWash mouth-breather.

Predictably, you lack the self-awareness to realize that it is your own self-centered non-sensical arguments that are in fact being taken to the cleaners.

Says the person who has -- in the guise of a hypothetical -- inserted their demand for bike lanes into discussion of the killing of a young child by a parent.

Please seek help. You're sick.

You - and/or your ilk - have been demanding for pages that Frumin put a pause on the use of housing vouchers in Ward 3. Those demands are apparently serious.

Since you apparently can’t figure it out for yourself, I’ll have to spell it out for you. No one is making a serious argument that the deaths of the children were due to a lack of bike lanes. That would be ridiculous.

What they are showing is that the logic of tying these deaths to the voucher program is just as ridiculous and just as offensive.

I trust that you now understand how sick it is to exploit these deaths for pet causes.

The voucher program brought violent criminals—like a man who could kill his own child—into the building where I lived with my family. It doesn’t affect someone like Frumin, so he’s glad it happened.

People like you have contempt for regular working families, so you’re glad it happened too.

Making an argument that vouchers given to others reduces your quality of life is a fine argument.

But it’s a very different argument than one that suggests that vouchers resulted in the kid being killed.

I don’t take issue with your opposition to vouchers housing people in your neighborhood.

But to exploit the death of a child to try to make your life better - which distracts from the factors that actually contributed to his death - is sick.

I’m not sure what part of this you fail to understand. Vouchers helped cause this. DC, by pushing housing of the most vulnerable to the private sector and removing oversight, and at the same time removing the private sector’s legal ability to exercise its own oversight, created unsafe an chaotic housing conditions that led directly to this. DC decided that equity (in the form of sn above market voucher system) was more important than safety.

You’ve constructed an elaborate scenario to confirm an obsessive against voucher holders in NW that you held well before this tragic incident. That scenario is based on complete nonsense. You have absolutely no understanding of the life of this family or any other families that benefit from vouchers. Your prognostications of what would have happened in the absence of being extended a housing voucher are pulled straight from a place where the sun don’t shine. You are an embarrassment to discourse. Please stop.

It’s not “elaborate” to anyone but you.

Elaborate was kind. Utter bullshit is more accurate.

I don’t know how you sleep at night with the knowledge that you exploit the deaths of dead kids to keep voucher recipients out of your neighborhood.

I left the neighborhood because I could t sleep at night in it as my building descended into crime and chaos. I don’t know how you, Frumin, Bowser eta all can think it is right to inflict that on people.

I don’t see anyone on here defending the way the voucher program is being run.

But do you really need to use the violent deaths of two innocent children to draw attention to your specific problems?

I'm not using the deaths of two innocent children to do anything. Sorry that the voucher program is such an ongoing never-ending disaster that you want to forbid discussion of it.

Not forbidding anything. Just calling you (and maybe others) who exhibit shameless and appalling levels of self-centeredness.

People do not like to live around crime - not sure why this is hard for you to get. If you actually cared about the voucher program you’d acknowledge its failures and try to fix it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chen supporting one made no difference, I did not vote for Frumin but this is so far beyond him. Cheh’s comments outside Days Inn did likely bump her from office. Predates him by at least a decade+. Chen even got social workers put in Sedgwick Gardens for a time, voucher tenants did not engage. Without the threat of losing the voucher, no effective curbs on behavior. Public housing you can be kicked out and banned. With vouchers, crime, you get moved from Sedgwick Gardens to Brandywine. Do not pay your share, move from Brandywine to Saratoga or Connecticut House.

Truth

But Frump owns it now. He has been negligent or worse on this issue, and it's the vulnerable poor children in these families who are suffering the most

It's not about how the rent is paid but about how children are not protected from known to be violent men. Had they lived in public housing in SE, poor DeAndre would be just as dead.

Frumin is on the housing committee. Still, press him to address CPS laxity and to push USAO to protect women and kids from violent men.

If the children were homeless or in public housing still would not help them. I get that you hate Frumin and I'm not a fan, but your focus on housing is not going to help kids like DeAndre.

Violent men do not need "services" that they are not even required to participate in. They need to be REMOVED FROM THE COMMUNITY.

I wonder about this. One of the consequences of “equity” and sending voucher recipients to Ward 3 is that communities are broken up. Maybe if these kids were in Anacostia the neighborhood church ladies would have looked out for them. Or the school more attuned to signs of abuse and less scared of being labeled “Karens.” Or even relatives around to check in.

This is despicable derailing nonsense. Plenty of toddlers and children are being terrorized across DC and anyone with half a brain can come up with two dozen reasons why “sending voucher recipients to Ward 3” would actually help the respective families get the services (including MPD attention) they need to find a way out of their horror. But on balance, vouchers had nothing to do with this. Stop exploiting the deaths of two children to advocate for push your own pet policy preferences, which seem to almost exclusively serve the goal of keeping all the dysfunction in DC sequestered in EOTR neighborhoods.

Vouchers have everything to do with the blight and crime that have be fallen the Connecticut Ave corridor. It’s you who are using the death of these poor kids to stifle an uncomfortable conversation. The city has had years to fix this. Time is up.

So you are solely focused on what impacts you and not failures by USAO and CFS that have directly led to the brutal deaths of many kids in DC? Your priority is to highjack focus on dead kids to focus on where they were when killed? Journee was a MD resident. If they died elsewhere, no prob?

There have been dozens of threads on here about vouchers, even more community meetings and hearings. Stifled?

Their deaths were not due to housing. Letting USAO and CFS skate, stifling THAT life and death discussion because you think it will never impact you, when these kids are barely cold is something.

I was also surprised 911 answered promptly and sent help to the correct address, not a given, and hasn’t been for many years.

Well I’ll play your game.

Dad applies for voucher.
Dad gets denied voucher.
Dad cannot house his children.
CPS takes children away and puts into foster care.
Dad does not murder his child.


It’s actually quite easy to see how the voucher plays in here.

We can agree to disagree on whether vouchers are appropriate in well established buildings where families and elderly live. For the record, I don’t think they are. Mixing violent criminals with children and elderly is never a good idea.

And we both agree that the DC child welfare system is wholly inadequate.

Let’s see what we can do with this logic . . .

1. Protected bike lanes are built on CT Ave, as was previously decided many moons ago by DDOT

2. Families living along CT Ave have an safe alternative to using their vehicles to run errands in the neighborhood and around NW DC

3. Deandre Pettus is not reliant on his car for running errands etc.

4. Deandre doesn’t suffer the frustration of being immobilized due to a flat car battery and so never gets angry that morning.

5. Deandre Pettus doesn’t beat his son to death.

You might find the assumptions underlying this hypothetical chain of events to be ridiculous, but those assumptions are no less so than your own.

Just like you don’t see bicycle safety advocates exploiting the deaths of these two children to call out the NIMBYs for blocking the CT Ave bike lane, you should similarly exhibit a modicum of decency and refrain from trying to make stupid arguments about how the tragic deaths of these two children were caused by DC residents using housing vouchers to move to Upper NW.

What a hilarious self-own from a typically ghoulish GGWash mouth-breather.

Predictably, you lack the self-awareness to realize that it is your own self-centered non-sensical arguments that are in fact being taken to the cleaners.

Says the person who has -- in the guise of a hypothetical -- inserted their demand for bike lanes into discussion of the killing of a young child by a parent.

Please seek help. You're sick.

You - and/or your ilk - have been demanding for pages that Frumin put a pause on the use of housing vouchers in Ward 3. Those demands are apparently serious.

Since you apparently can’t figure it out for yourself, I’ll have to spell it out for you. No one is making a serious argument that the deaths of the children were due to a lack of bike lanes. That would be ridiculous.

What they are showing is that the logic of tying these deaths to the voucher program is just as ridiculous and just as offensive.

I trust that you now understand how sick it is to exploit these deaths for pet causes.

The voucher program brought violent criminals—like a man who could kill his own child—into the building where I lived with my family. It doesn’t affect someone like Frumin, so he’s glad it happened.

People like you have contempt for regular working families, so you’re glad it happened too.

Making an argument that vouchers given to others reduces your quality of life is a fine argument.

But it’s a very different argument than one that suggests that vouchers resulted in the kid being killed.

I don’t take issue with your opposition to vouchers housing people in your neighborhood.

But to exploit the death of a child to try to make your life better - which distracts from the factors that actually contributed to his death - is sick.

I’m not sure what part of this you fail to understand. Vouchers helped cause this. DC, by pushing housing of the most vulnerable to the private sector and removing oversight, and at the same time removing the private sector’s legal ability to exercise its own oversight, created unsafe an chaotic housing conditions that led directly to this. DC decided that equity (in the form of sn above market voucher system) was more important than safety.

You’ve constructed an elaborate scenario to confirm an obsessive against voucher holders in NW that you held well before this tragic incident. That scenario is based on complete nonsense. You have absolutely no understanding of the life of this family or any other families that benefit from vouchers. Your prognostications of what would have happened in the absence of being extended a housing voucher are pulled straight from a place where the sun don’t shine. You are an embarrassment to discourse. Please stop.

It’s not “elaborate” to anyone but you.

Elaborate was kind. Utter bullshit is more accurate.

I don’t know how you sleep at night with the knowledge that you exploit the deaths of dead kids to keep voucher recipients out of your neighborhood.

I left the neighborhood because I could t sleep at night in it as my building descended into crime and chaos. I don’t know how you, Frumin, Bowser eta all can think it is right to inflict that on people.

I don’t see anyone on here defending the way the voucher program is being run.

But do you really need to use the violent deaths of two innocent children to draw attention to your specific problems?

I'm not using the deaths of two innocent children to do anything. Sorry that the voucher program is such an ongoing never-ending disaster that you want to forbid discussion of it.

Not forbidding anything. Just calling you (and maybe others) who exhibit shameless and appalling levels of self-centeredness.

People do not like to live around crime - not sure why this is hard for you to get. If you actually cared about the voucher program you’d acknowledge its failures and try to fix it.

DP, claiming that those who want just 1 thread focused on the deaths of DeAndre and Journee "actually care about the voucher program" is a ridiculous strawman as is the insinuation that we somehow "like" to live around crime. Protecting kids in DC is a CFS and USAO issue. Both repeatedly failed DeAndre and his sisters.

Crime and vouchers have many other threads. Trying to push the focus off the dead kids and identified at risk kids in this 1 thread is not cool, it only enables those directly responsible for child protection to continue on with failed practices. While DC has no control over USAO, they have complete control over CFSA and the ME's office. CFSA claims to be investigating what happened re: reunification with DeAndre Pettus. Bowser needs to feel the heat about that, as does the Council. The ME is of dubious quality and findings and practices should also be scrutinized.

The safety of the 2 young girls and other identified at risk kids in DC deserves to be the focus of public attention. May they be protected and stay safe.

Have at discussions of vouchers and crime in the MANY other threads focused on them in this sub. If the issues are just now on your radar, they contain many links to in depth WP and other pieces.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP, I have personally attended dozens of community meetings, Council hearings etc. trying to push back on the program, over many years. I am not a fan or proponent.

2 dead young kids deserve a thread focused on them. Little is known about Journee but it's clear that USAO and CFS failed to protect DeAndre, repeatedly. That directly contributed to his death at the hands of his father. It was not a housing issue per se. Making the thread about how the voucher program has impacted me, or you, is a disservice to them. And allows USAO and CFS (which DC has complete control and oversight over) to continue practices and policies that may result in more child deaths. The safety of DeAndre's sisters continues to be in question when the killer of a 5 year old with his BARE HANDS is not even wearing a GPS monitor.

Here is a housing/voucher focused thread. It may particularly be of interest to those new to the issue.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113541.page#27392796

Thank you very much for this. These two kids absolutely deserve their own thread that is not brigaded by folk determined to take the focus away from the true causes of these tragedies and talk about their own, comparatively insignificant, problems. Hopefully DCUMers will have the decency to respect that going forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, I have personally attended dozens of community meetings, Council hearings etc. trying to push back on the program, over many years. I am not a fan or proponent.

2 dead young kids deserve a thread focused on them. Little is known about Journee but it's clear that USAO and CFS failed to protect DeAndre, repeatedly. That directly contributed to his death at the hands of his father. It was not a housing issue per se. Making the thread about how the voucher program has impacted me, or you, is a disservice to them. And allows USAO and CFS (which DC has complete control and oversight over) to continue practices and policies that may result in more child deaths. The safety of DeAndre's sisters continues to be in question when the killer of a 5 year old with his BARE HANDS is not even wearing a GPS monitor.

Here is a housing/voucher focused thread. It may particularly be of interest to those new to the issue.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113541.page#27392796

Thank you very much for this. These two kids absolutely deserve their own thread that is not brigaded by folk determined to take the focus away from the true causes of these tragedies and talk about their own, comparatively insignificant, problems. Hopefully DCUMers will have the decency to respect that going forward.

I'm the PP and the voucher program definitely is extremely problematic. However, kids at risk are at risk wherever they live and the government actors who are their only source of safety need to be focused on separately and held to account. They have failed kids over and over.

That DeAndre Pettus is walking around my neighborhood today is unacceptable. May his remaining children stay safe. May an arrest be made in Journee's case. RIP little ones. So sorry you are not here today.

USAO, CFS and ME must do better. Politicians must be held to account. Reunification goals should not take precedence over life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chen supporting one made no difference, I did not vote for Frumin but this is so far beyond him. Cheh’s comments outside Days Inn did likely bump her from office. Predates him by at least a decade+. Chen even got social workers put in Sedgwick Gardens for a time, voucher tenants did not engage. Without the threat of losing the voucher, no effective curbs on behavior. Public housing you can be kicked out and banned. With vouchers, crime, you get moved from Sedgwick Gardens to Brandywine. Do not pay your share, move from Brandywine to Saratoga or Connecticut House.

Truth

But Frump owns it now. He has been negligent or worse on this issue, and it's the vulnerable poor children in these families who are suffering the most

It's not about how the rent is paid but about how children are not protected from known to be violent men. Had they lived in public housing in SE, poor DeAndre would be just as dead.

Frumin is on the housing committee. Still, press him to address CPS laxity and to push USAO to protect women and kids from violent men.

If the children were homeless or in public housing still would not help them. I get that you hate Frumin and I'm not a fan, but your focus on housing is not going to help kids like DeAndre.

Violent men do not need "services" that they are not even required to participate in. They need to be REMOVED FROM THE COMMUNITY.

I wonder about this. One of the consequences of “equity” and sending voucher recipients to Ward 3 is that communities are broken up. Maybe if these kids were in Anacostia the neighborhood church ladies would have looked out for them. Or the school more attuned to signs of abuse and less scared of being labeled “Karens.” Or even relatives around to check in.

This is despicable derailing nonsense. Plenty of toddlers and children are being terrorized across DC and anyone with half a brain can come up with two dozen reasons why “sending voucher recipients to Ward 3” would actually help the respective families get the services (including MPD attention) they need to find a way out of their horror. But on balance, vouchers had nothing to do with this. Stop exploiting the deaths of two children to advocate for push your own pet policy preferences, which seem to almost exclusively serve the goal of keeping all the dysfunction in DC sequestered in EOTR neighborhoods.

Vouchers have everything to do with the blight and crime that have be fallen the Connecticut Ave corridor. It’s you who are using the death of these poor kids to stifle an uncomfortable conversation. The city has had years to fix this. Time is up.

So you are solely focused on what impacts you and not failures by USAO and CFS that have directly led to the brutal deaths of many kids in DC? Your priority is to highjack focus on dead kids to focus on where they were when killed? Journee was a MD resident. If they died elsewhere, no prob?

There have been dozens of threads on here about vouchers, even more community meetings and hearings. Stifled?

Their deaths were not due to housing. Letting USAO and CFS skate, stifling THAT life and death discussion because you think it will never impact you, when these kids are barely cold is something.

I was also surprised 911 answered promptly and sent help to the correct address, not a given, and hasn’t been for many years.

Well I’ll play your game.

Dad applies for voucher.
Dad gets denied voucher.
Dad cannot house his children.
CPS takes children away and puts into foster care.
Dad does not murder his child.


It’s actually quite easy to see how the voucher plays in here.

We can agree to disagree on whether vouchers are appropriate in well established buildings where families and elderly live. For the record, I don’t think they are. Mixing violent criminals with children and elderly is never a good idea.

And we both agree that the DC child welfare system is wholly inadequate.

Let’s see what we can do with this logic . . .

1. Protected bike lanes are built on CT Ave, as was previously decided many moons ago by DDOT

2. Families living along CT Ave have an safe alternative to using their vehicles to run errands in the neighborhood and around NW DC

3. Deandre Pettus is not reliant on his car for running errands etc.

4. Deandre doesn’t suffer the frustration of being immobilized due to a flat car battery and so never gets angry that morning.

5. Deandre Pettus doesn’t beat his son to death.

You might find the assumptions underlying this hypothetical chain of events to be ridiculous, but those assumptions are no less so than your own.

Just like you don’t see bicycle safety advocates exploiting the deaths of these two children to call out the NIMBYs for blocking the CT Ave bike lane, you should similarly exhibit a modicum of decency and refrain from trying to make stupid arguments about how the tragic deaths of these two children were caused by DC residents using housing vouchers to move to Upper NW.

What a hilarious self-own from a typically ghoulish GGWash mouth-breather.

Predictably, you lack the self-awareness to realize that it is your own self-centered non-sensical arguments that are in fact being taken to the cleaners.

Says the person who has -- in the guise of a hypothetical -- inserted their demand for bike lanes into discussion of the killing of a young child by a parent.

Please seek help. You're sick.

You - and/or your ilk - have been demanding for pages that Frumin put a pause on the use of housing vouchers in Ward 3. Those demands are apparently serious.

Since you apparently can’t figure it out for yourself, I’ll have to spell it out for you. No one is making a serious argument that the deaths of the children were due to a lack of bike lanes. That would be ridiculous.

What they are showing is that the logic of tying these deaths to the voucher program is just as ridiculous and just as offensive.

I trust that you now understand how sick it is to exploit these deaths for pet causes.

The voucher program brought violent criminals—like a man who could kill his own child—into the building where I lived with my family. It doesn’t affect someone like Frumin, so he’s glad it happened.

People like you have contempt for regular working families, so you’re glad it happened too.

Making an argument that vouchers given to others reduces your quality of life is a fine argument.

But it’s a very different argument than one that suggests that vouchers resulted in the kid being killed.

I don’t take issue with your opposition to vouchers housing people in your neighborhood.

But to exploit the death of a child to try to make your life better - which distracts from the factors that actually contributed to his death - is sick.

I’m not sure what part of this you fail to understand. Vouchers helped cause this. DC, by pushing housing of the most vulnerable to the private sector and removing oversight, and at the same time removing the private sector’s legal ability to exercise its own oversight, created unsafe an chaotic housing conditions that led directly to this. DC decided that equity (in the form of sn above market voucher system) was more important than safety.

You’ve constructed an elaborate scenario to confirm an obsessive against voucher holders in NW that you held well before this tragic incident. That scenario is based on complete nonsense. You have absolutely no understanding of the life of this family or any other families that benefit from vouchers. Your prognostications of what would have happened in the absence of being extended a housing voucher are pulled straight from a place where the sun don’t shine. You are an embarrassment to discourse. Please stop.

It’s not “elaborate” to anyone but you.

Elaborate was kind. Utter bullshit is more accurate.

I don’t know how you sleep at night with the knowledge that you exploit the deaths of dead kids to keep voucher recipients out of your neighborhood.

I left the neighborhood because I could t sleep at night in it as my building descended into crime and chaos. I don’t know how you, Frumin, Bowser eta all can think it is right to inflict that on people.

I don’t see anyone on here defending the way the voucher program is being run.

But do you really need to use the violent deaths of two innocent children to draw attention to your specific problems?

I'm not using the deaths of two innocent children to do anything. Sorry that the voucher program is such an ongoing never-ending disaster that you want to forbid discussion of it.

Not forbidding anything. Just calling you (and maybe others) who exhibit shameless and appalling levels of self-centeredness.

People do not like to live around crime - not sure why this is hard for you to get. If you actually cared about the voucher program you’d acknowledge its failures and try to fix it.

DP, claiming that those who want just 1 thread focused on the deaths of DeAndre and Journee "actually care about the voucher program" is a ridiculous strawman as is the insinuation that we somehow "like" to live around crime. Protecting kids in DC is a CFS and USAO issue. Both repeatedly failed DeAndre and his sisters.

Crime and vouchers have many other threads. Trying to push the focus off the dead kids and identified at risk kids in this 1 thread is not cool, it only enables those directly responsible for child protection to continue on with failed practices. While DC has no control over USAO, they have complete control over CFSA and the ME's office. CFSA claims to be investigating what happened re: reunification with DeAndre Pettus. Bowser needs to feel the heat about that, as does the Council. The ME is of dubious quality and findings and practices should also be scrutinized.

The safety of the 2 young girls and other identified at risk kids in DC deserves to be the focus of public attention. May they be protected and stay safe.

Have at discussions of vouchers and crime in the MANY other threads focused on them in this sub. If the issues are just now on your radar, they contain many links to in depth WP and other pieces.

So let me get this straight. It is inappropriate to discuss CRIME in a thread about the MURDER of a child?

Truly you people are astonishing in how you believe you can control “the narrative.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, I have personally attended dozens of community meetings, Council hearings etc. trying to push back on the program, over many years. I am not a fan or proponent.

2 dead young kids deserve a thread focused on them. Little is known about Journee but it's clear that USAO and CFS failed to protect DeAndre, repeatedly. That directly contributed to his death at the hands of his father. It was not a housing issue per se. Making the thread about how the voucher program has impacted me, or you, is a disservice to them. And allows USAO and CFS (which DC has complete control and oversight over) to continue practices and policies that may result in more child deaths. The safety of DeAndre's sisters continues to be in question when the killer of a 5 year old with his BARE HANDS is not even wearing a GPS monitor.

Here is a housing/voucher focused thread. It may particularly be of interest to those new to the issue.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113541.page#27392796

Thank you very much for this. These two kids absolutely deserve their own thread that is not brigaded by folk determined to take the focus away from the true causes of these tragedies and talk about their own, comparatively insignificant, problems. Hopefully DCUMers will have the decency to respect that going forward.

I'm the PP and the voucher program definitely is extremely problematic. However, kids at risk are at risk wherever they live and the government actors who are their only source of safety need to be focused on separately and held to account. They have failed kids over and over.

That DeAndre Pettus is walking around my neighborhood today is unacceptable. May his remaining children stay safe. May an arrest be made in Journee's case. RIP little ones. So sorry you are not here today.

USAO, CFS and ME must do better. Politicians must be held to account. Reunification goals should not take precedence over life.

These kids would have been LESS at risk if their father has not been given a no-strings-attached voucher. The voucher should have been pulled and kids sent to foster care when he assaulted his neighbor. Social workers should have been in the apartment weekly noting any squalor or signs of abuse as a condition of continued housing. This is absolutely related to the voucher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, I have personally attended dozens of community meetings, Council hearings etc. trying to push back on the program, over many years. I am not a fan or proponent.

2 dead young kids deserve a thread focused on them. Little is known about Journee but it's clear that USAO and CFS failed to protect DeAndre, repeatedly. That directly contributed to his death at the hands of his father. It was not a housing issue per se. Making the thread about how the voucher program has impacted me, or you, is a disservice to them. And allows USAO and CFS (which DC has complete control and oversight over) to continue practices and policies that may result in more child deaths. The safety of DeAndre's sisters continues to be in question when the killer of a 5 year old with his BARE HANDS is not even wearing a GPS monitor.

Here is a housing/voucher focused thread. It may particularly be of interest to those new to the issue.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113541.page#27392796

Thank you very much for this. These two kids absolutely deserve their own thread that is not brigaded by folk determined to take the focus away from the true causes of these tragedies and talk about their own, comparatively insignificant, problems. Hopefully DCUMers will have the decency to respect that going forward.

I'm the PP and the voucher program definitely is extremely problematic. However, kids at risk are at risk wherever they live and the government actors who are their only source of safety need to be focused on separately and held to account. They have failed kids over and over.

That DeAndre Pettus is walking around my neighborhood today is unacceptable. May his remaining children stay safe. May an arrest be made in Journee's case. RIP little ones. So sorry you are not here today.

USAO, CFS and ME must do better. Politicians must be held to account. Reunification goals should not take precedence over life.

These kids would have been LESS at risk if their father has not been given a no-strings-attached voucher. The voucher should have been pulled and kids sent to foster care when he assaulted his neighbor. Social workers should have been in the apartment weekly noting any squalor or signs of abuse as a condition of continued housing. This is absolutely related to the voucher.

Did you not read any of the links in the thread? The kids WERE taken by CPS when he was arrested in 2023 and once reunified, they were given oversight for a time. That oversight was stopped needs scrutiny. That reunification was such a weighted goal needs scrutiny. That CFSA is now "investigating" their past involvement needs to be something Bowser and the Council are pressed on. Their email and X accounts are public. Keyboard warriors on this thread, do something that actually matters. Frumin advocated contacting CFSA, he should be pressed to co-chair hearings on their policies and practices. The Council has direct oversight over DC agencies.

DC NEVER pulls vouchers. WP has written about that too. The link has been in several threads in this sub including upthread. That policy also deserves scrutiny.