By Valencia Mohammed
Special to the AFRO
Former DC Mayor Marion Barry defended himself against charges of stalking. (Courtesy Photo)
|
(July 8, 2009) - Councilman Marion Barry, 73, one of the most controversial political figures in D.C. history, held a press conference on July 6, to defend his honor, again, after a recent arrest by U.S. Park Police.
At the conference, held outside the D.C. Council headquarters, Barry's longtime attorney Frederick D. Cooke Jr., spoke candidly with the media about the arrest on July 4 after Barry was accused of stalking his former lover. "The charges against Mr. Barry have not been formally lodged by the US Attorney's office. The alleged complaint is baseless and stems from a personal relationship that has gone wrong in many ways," Cooke said.
According to a press release generated by the U.S. Park Police, at about 8:45 July 4, a United States Park Police officer was patrolling Anacostia Park in the area of Good Hope Road. The officer was flagged down by a woman, who pointed to the occupant of a nearby BMW vehicle. The woman claimed she was being "stalked" by the driver, identified as Marion S. Barry.
At a press briefing on July 5, Barry spokeswoman, Natalie Williams, identified the woman as Donna Watts, 40, a Ward 8 resident. Williams also said Barry felt "betrayed" because he has supported Watts through many stages of her instability. "Mr. Barry has assisted Ms. Watts to find employment and lent his friendship," said Williams.
Cooke gave more details about the incident. According to Cooke, Barry and Watts were in a relationship for approximately 18 months. The couple was traveling to Rehoboth Beach to celebrate Independence Day. They stopped at a restaurant in Annapolis for lunch.
Afterwards they decided to return to the District. They departed each other's company after reaching the District.
That afternoon, Barry visited Watts' home at her invitation. Barry left after a brief stay.
Around 8 pm, Barry ran into Watts in Anacostia Park where ex-husband, DeLonte Brighthaupt, a former Capitol Hill Police officer, accompanied her. Barry decided to drive home. It was around that time when park police stopped the two vehicles for questioning and later arrested Barry.
As the news of Barry's arrest became public, Watts' account of the incident contradicted that of the police. According to statements made by Watts to other media services and through electronic listserves, Watts claimed she did not flag down police and that Barry was stopped for a traffic violation. Unconfirmed sources said it was Brighthaupt that flagged the police after Barry's vehicle passed Watts' vehicle.
Brighthaupt is no stranger to Barry. Cooke said on July 1, Barry requested security at the Council headquarters to bar Brighthaught from a hearing following a heated argument between the two men over Watts a few days prior. Brighthaupt could not be reached for comments.
Sgt. David Schlosser, public information officer for the U.S. Park Police, said he was unaware of any traffic violation. Schlosser confirmed Barry's vehicle was impounded. Barry was released on citation with a mandatory court appearance on July 9, in D.C. Superior Court.
New developments have also surfaced about Barry's financial relationship with Watts. Williams confirmed that Watts was previously under contract with Barry's office to provide information for his "Emerging Leaders" Program. The amount of the contract and complete details were unavailable at press time.
Speculation is rising about whether Barry's recent arrest will effect his probation. "We must first wait to see what and if there will be any formal charges against Mr. Barry before we jump to this," Cooke said.
According to US Park Police records, Barry was arrested for drunk driving in September 2006 and refusing to take a breathalyzer test. Later that year, he was arrested for driving with a suspended license.
Barry claimed and proved his innocence and was acquitted on both charges. Barry has said repeatedly he has been unjustly targeted and harassed by the US Park Police and has a pending lawsuit.
This copy of remarks by Councilmenber Marion Barry's spokesperson, delivered at an evening press conference this week, were sent to the AFRO on Wednesday, shortly before press time. As an addendum to the story published in the July 11 edition of the Washington AFRO American Newspaper, we are posting the remarks in their entirety.
Good evening, thank you for joining me this evening for this press briefing. I stand here before you as the spokesperson for Councilmember Marion Barry. My words here this evening stand as a direct voice of the councilmember and his legal council.
You may recall that I implied this morning in an interview and throughout this whole ordeal that Ms. Watts was in fact unstable. Mr. Barry chose – through me – to choose his words very carefully and without continued public embarrassment and humiliation to Ms. Watts.
However, in light of the recent developments in the case which occurred over the weekend, and the continued false allegations which are being lodged against Mr. Barry, we believe that it is now time for the truth surrounding Mr. Barry’s relationship with Ms. Watts to be fully disclosed to the public.
In past interviews, Mr. Barry has characterized Ms. Watts as being unstable. Tonight, we want to make it known that according to Ms. Watts herself she is currently under the care of local psychiatrist and has been diagnosed with compulsive behavior disorder and clinical depression. This diagnoses is from a well respected psychiatrist, and not the sole opinion of Mr. Barry nor Ms. Watts. Ladies and gentlemen of the district of Columbia, Ms. Watts should not be believed. Her allegations against Mr. Barry are simply not true. They are lies.
As it relates to the contract which was awarded to Ms. Watts by Councilmember Marion Barry. Let me begin by saying that the series of events surrounding the contract have nothing to do with the events which occurred over the 4th of July weekend. But because the media chooses to make big of it, I believe that it is important to enlighten the residents of the district of Columbia about the actions surrounding the contract to Ms. Watts.
Ms. Watts was awarded a contract by Mr. Barry in September of 2009. The contract was for $60k to be dispersed in increments of 5,000 per month. The contract was for the project entitled: emerging leaders. It was designed to develop a program to identify, recruit, and develop the next leaders of Ward 8.
The contract was awarded to Ms. Watts because she met the criteria for the job and the qualifications for that job. This was councilmember Barry’s response to Ms. Watts continuous notification to him about her financial plight – we are speaking of the fact that Ms. Watts was about to lose her house, her car, due to her inability to find employment.
The contract which was awarded to Ms. Watts was done so legally and under the guidelines of the City Council. The award was processed through the office of the secretary in Council of the District of Columbia in the same manner in which all contracts are awarded.
The fact that the contract was awarded to a friend or a relative of the former mayor, and in this case, Ms. Watts is irrelevant as long as it was awarded properly, and brought value for the money that was paid. This is absolutely the case for contract between Councilman Barry and Ms. Watts.
The contract provided for certain deliverables by Ms. Watts of which were delivered. Proof of those deliverables have been captured and documented through Ms. Watts own assertion of having performed these duties. Proof of these deliverables have also been captured in emails that have been forwarded to Councilmember Barry’s office by Ms. Watts.
For the record, and hear me loud and clear. It is not unusual nor is it illegal for councilmembers to award contracts to supporters who qualify or can provide the services that are required. Contracts such as these do not have to be bid on. Councilmembers have it within their rights to award contracts to sole sources which many of them do. Councilmembers also have the right to select those individuals with whom they deem can best do the job. In this case, Mr. Barry believed that Ms. Watts met the qualifications and had the experience to fulfill the requirements.
As Mr. Barry has attested all along. Ms. Watts is not to be believed. Her false allegations of the events which happened in the park on July 4th are proof of her instability. Her recanting of her statement is proof of her instability. Her rambled statement to the media a few days ago is proof of her instability. Ms. Watts has said that at no time was she ever in fear of Mr. Barry. At no time was she ever threatened by Mr. Barry, and at no time was she ever stalked by Mr. Barry.
It is our hope that the case against Mr. Barry will be dropped by the U.S. Attorney’s office on Thursday, so that we may all get back to the true business of the District of Columbia.