Over the past several weeks, senior leaders at the D.C. Department of Forensic Sciences have come under intense scrutiny. The crime lab is under criminal investigation over its handling of a ballistics error in a murder case and, in a rare move earlier this month, a national forensic quality board yanked the lab鈥檚 accreditation to perform all forensic testing, bringing to an abrupt halt the processing of guns, DNA and fingerprint evidence amid a spike in homicides across the District.
As city leaders prepare to appear before a D.C. Council oversight roundtable about the lab鈥檚 troubles Thursday, 草莓传媒 has learned some former and current employees were concerned about DFS Director Dr. Jenifer Smith鈥檚 leadership long before the lab lost accreditation, and that some of them raised the matter with other officials in D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser鈥檚 administration.
Thursday鈥檚 oversight roundtable was expected to be the first time the public would hear from Smith since the lab had its accreditation suspended April 2, but 草莓传媒 has learned the agency director will not be testifying or answering council members’ questions.
The investigation into the D.C. lab doesn’t only involve claims of faulty science; it calls into question the integrity of senior leaders at the lab. A scathing report filed last month in D.C. Superior Court by a team of experts hired by prosecutors alleged that, in responding to the discovery of the error that linked two cartridge casings to the same gun, lab managers sought to conceal conflicting conclusions by multiple examiners and pressured others to report a finding of 鈥渋nconclusive鈥� on the matter. Prosecutors say four independent experts have since examined the disputed casings and determined they were not fired in the same gun.
For this report, 草莓传媒 spoke with the head of the union that represents DFS employees as well as eight current and former agency employees, who all spoke on the condition of anonymity, saying they feared retaliation either toward themselves or toward employees who are still employed by the agency.
Many of the employees expressed the view that Smith, a longtime FBI DNA expert who was appointed by Bowser to lead the agency in 2015, presided over a toxic workplace environment where employees feared being fired at any moment. Former employees said that environment bred a culture of fear where workers may have felt pressured to bury problems and not raise concerns, and managers seen as too critical or insufficiently loyal to Smith were pushed out.
‘Culture of fear’
In 2019, when Smith鈥檚 initial four-year term as director was nearing its end, 草莓传媒 has learned that at least two former DFS employees went to Kevin Donohue, then D.C.鈥檚 deputy mayor of public safety and justice, to share serious concerns about Smith鈥檚 leadership of the agency.
鈥淚 know the impact a bad leader can have on an organization,鈥� one of the former employees told 草莓传媒 of their decision to speak with Donohue about their concerns. 鈥淢orale affects people鈥檚 ability to function effectively. When people have difficulty functioning, mistakes are more likely; carelessness is more likely. It鈥檚 not an environment for excellence.鈥�
Another recalled telling Donohue that morale at the agency was low and people were afraid of losing their jobs due to rampant firings. 鈥淎nd that creates a culture of fear where no one comes forward when there is a quality issue,鈥� the former employee told 草莓传媒.
The employees did not share with Donohue any concerns that managers had concealed documents or pressured workers to change conclusions 鈥� allegations at the heart of the report that spurred the lab鈥檚 loss of accreditation.
Still, the former employees thought they delivered a clear message: They cautioned Donohue that they feared the organization would continue to deteriorate under Smith鈥檚 leadership and that officials, up to the mayor, would likely regret deciding to keep her in the job.
One of the former employees who spoke to Donohue about Smith鈥檚 leadership said they aren鈥檛 sure Donohue, who鈥檚 now the city administrator, 鈥済ot it.鈥�
In the end, Bowser reappointed Smith to another four-year term.
Olivia Dedner, a spokeswoman for the city administrator鈥檚 office, told 草莓传媒 that Donohue could not comment because the concerns involved a personnel matter.
DFS officials did not provide responses to a request for comment about the concerns shared by employees regarding the lab鈥檚 culture and several other points. Instead, Acting Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice Chris Geldart provided an emailed statement to 草莓传媒 that did not address the allegations of a negative workplace culture, but did discuss staffing at the agency.
Geldart鈥檚 statement in part read:
“The Department of Forensic Sciences works to recruit and maintain a diverse workforce of skilled scientists, forensic professionals, and support staff who are committed to the agency鈥檚 critical mission. As with any government agency with a highly qualified workforce, DFS employees have pursued career opportunities at other government agencies and the private sector, and the agency has recruited new staff with outstanding professional experience.”
草莓传媒 has also learned that similar concerns were shared with at least two D.C. Council members, including Council Chairman Phil Mendelson and Charles Allen, the chairman of the judiciary and public safety committee, who will hold the hearing Thursday.
In a statement provided by his spokesman, Allen told 草莓传媒: 鈥淚n the interest in protecting the confidentiality of persons who wish to share information with the Committee, we cannot verify more than to say the Committee has previously received confidential concerns regarding the management and workplace culture at the Department of Forensic Sciences. These concerns were raised to Executive branch leadership and have been used to inform our oversight in the past and in advance of this week鈥檚 hearing on the suspended accreditation of the lab.鈥�
A spokeswoman for Mendelson told 草莓传媒 in an email that the chairman does not have oversight of the lab but that he 鈥渂elieves the concerns are credible.鈥�
鈥楥aught dead in the middle of a catastrophe鈥�
While other crime labs throughout the country have come under the microscope in recent years, the loss of accreditation is rare 鈥� and it has had bruising consequences for the D.C. lab.
Under the 2011 legislation establishing the Department of Forensic Sciences as an independent agency, the lab is required to maintain accreditation. For nearly a month, the lab’s examiners have been unable to test or examine evidence in new or existing cases, and the city is relying on private contractors and the support of the federal Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives to handle the lab鈥檚 work.
The caseload is enormous. In any given month, according to the agency鈥檚 most recent annual report, the lab鈥檚 Forensic Science Laboratory receives hundreds of requests to analyze evidence, including guns, cartridge casings and DNA swabs from crime scenes all over the city.
Employees are upset that the allegations against management and the loss of accreditation have now threatened their livelihoods, and worried that the accusations against the lab will follow them if they seek work elsewhere, according to the agency鈥檚 union.
鈥淒ay in and day out, they鈥檙e reporting to work with nothing to do,鈥� said Lee Blackmon, the federal director of the National Association of Government Employees.
She added, 鈥淒FS employees are caught dead in the middle of a catastrophe.鈥�
Blackmon said the union is now concerned that lab leadership appears to be trying to interfere with the ongoing criminal probe, which is being carried out by the D.C. Office of the Inspector General.
Last month, the agency鈥檚 general counsel, Todd Smith, no relation to the agency鈥檚 director, called a meeting of the lab鈥檚 firearms examination unit at which he reportedly told staffers the inspector general鈥檚 investigation was 鈥渦nlawful鈥� and that employees should inform him if agents request interviews or documents, according to a source who reported the meeting to the inspector general鈥檚 office. The source told investigators that Todd Smith said he was speaking on behalf of Dr. Smith, the lab鈥檚 director.
Blackmon called that meeting a clear attempt to 鈥渃oerce employees鈥� into not cooperating with the inspector general鈥檚 investigation, when in fact they have a duty to do so, she said.
鈥淚t says something about this unethical leadership that he would do that openly and in a group setting,鈥� Blackmon said of Todd Smith鈥檚 meeting with employees.
In response to several questions from 草莓传媒 about Todd Smith鈥檚 meeting with employees, the statement from Geldart, the deputy mayor, said:
鈥淲e are fully committed to ensuring an independent and accredited forensics laboratory. We will continue to work with the Science Advisory Board, Office of the Inspector General, United States Attorney鈥檚 Office, Office of the Attorney General, and accreditation agencies, and have encouraged DFS staff to cooperate with ongoing investigations and reviews. Throughout this process, we have worked to ensure the uninterrupted collection and analysis of all forensic evidence so there is no impact on criminal cases. We plan to remain in this posture until regaining accreditation.鈥�
鈥楽omething changed鈥�
For more than a year, prosecutors and the lab have been locked in an acrimonious legal battle over the lab鈥檚 handling of firearms evidence.
Federal prosecutors and the D.C. attorney general鈥檚 office retained a team of experts last spring to look into the lab鈥檚 firearms unit following the discovery of the error in the 2015 case.
In an exclusive interview with 草莓传媒 last fall, Dr. Smith defended her agency as a 鈥渄arn good lab鈥� and said the disputed 2015 finding had been thoroughly reviewed by the lab, prompting the change in finding to 鈥渋nconclusive鈥� and that the lab had instituted a whole series of reforms to make sure similar errors didn’t happen in the future. She said a broader dispute with federal prosecutors over the firearms unit鈥檚 casework stemmed from differences in interpretation that are common in some fields of forensic science. She suggested the lab鈥檚 鈥渋nconclusive鈥� findings indicated its examiners were more conservative in reaching conclusions about evidence than prosecutors wanted.
Officials with the U.S. Attorney鈥檚 Office, the office of the D.C. Attorney General and the Public Defender Service are all expected to appear before the D.C. Council oversight roundtable Thursday.
The lab has been on embattled ground before. In 2015, Smith was brought in to the agency to clean up a past blunder by the lab. That year, the lab鈥檚 DNA practices were criticized by prosecutors; a follow-up audit by the same forensic board that earlier this month moved to strip the lab鈥檚 accreditation recommended a temporary pause on DNA casework until the lab鈥檚 analysts could be trained on improved methods. As a result, Bowser, then just a few months into her first term, sacked the lab鈥檚 former director and a slew of other agency officials.
The current suspension of the lab鈥檚 accreditation is much wider in scope than the 2015 audit. Despite that, Bowser has voiced support for the lab, telling reporters at a press conference on April 5 she wants an investigation into the allegations but that she was 鈥渇ully defending鈥� the lab鈥檚 practices.
Former employees described Smith to 草莓传媒 as smart, accomplished and committed 鈥斅� someone who worked punishingly long hours at the office. When she first came to the agency amid the turmoil of the DNA issue, she pledged to revamp the agency.
鈥淭he first year that Dr. Smith was there, she was great to work with,鈥� a former employee told 草莓传媒. 鈥淪he had a lot of great ideas. Then something changed. I can鈥檛 begin to tell you the emotional trauma people went through.鈥�
Smith began managing 鈥渂y fear and intimidation,鈥� the former employee said. 鈥淗er management style stifled innovation at the lab. People feared being singled out.鈥�
None of the employees said they saw evidence of concealing documents or pressuring employees to change conclusions. But the former employees said Smith had a bitter, adversarial relationship with the U.S. Attorney鈥檚 Office and resisted disclosing quality issues and disciplinary matters, which some employees felt stretched the ethical lines.
A 2020 probe of the lab by the Fraud and Corruption Unit of the Justice Department, for example, included allegations that Smith pressured the agency鈥檚 former general counsel to soften discipline for employees accused of misconduct so they could still testify in court. After that report was filed, DFS wrote to D.C. court officials accusing the lab鈥檚 former general counsel of sharing confidential information with federal prosecutors and other serious misconduct.
In the end, the former employees said they believe the climate Smith fostered was a drain on quality control.
Several of the former workers 草莓传媒 spoke to are women, and they said they are sensitive to the impression that women bosses are sometimes held to a different standard in displaying anger and assertiveness.
鈥淣o one鈥檚 out to get this person,鈥� a current employee told 草莓传媒 referring to Smith. The employee said they had seen firsthand Smith yelling and screaming at employees. Employees 鈥渨ant to work in an environment that鈥檚 safe and healthy,鈥� the employee said. 鈥淭hey鈥檙e scientists. They just want to do their jobs.鈥�
Staffing issues
Across 2019 and 2020, the lab saw departures in some key roles, including several senior executives and personnel in its forensic disciplines, according to a 草莓传媒 review of organization charts and staffing lists in documents the lab provides annually to the D.C. Council and a review of the meeting minutes of the lab鈥檚 Scientific Advisory Board. Former employees speaking to 草莓传媒 confirmed the high degree of turnover at DFS, especially among senior management.
鈥淏efore I left, they were hemorrhaging people,鈥� an employee who left last year said. 鈥淵ou cannot keep people at DFS because it is just such a bad environment.鈥�
DFS budget and performance plans hint at the agency鈥檚 staffing troubles. Those documents say the turnover rate for the three years leading up to 2020 was 10.6%, although the trend was improving, the documents suggested. 鈥淭his is attributed to the concerted effort of the Executive Leadership Team to listen to feedback from exit interviews, maintain a strong open door policy and to engage in sometimes difficult dialogue,鈥� the agency wrote.
Some former employees said Smith, far from actually holding difficult dialogues, resisted different viewpoints.
鈥淪he aligned herself with people who would never question her opinions or her ideas,鈥� one of the former employees told 草莓传媒. 鈥淪he would gravitate toward those who agreed with all of her opinions.鈥�
Multiple former employees pointed to the agency鈥檚 newly created senior deputy director position.
Under the 2011 legislation establishing the agency, the lab is required to have a deputy director with an advanced degree in forensic science or another applicable science, and at least two years of experience in the field of forensic science.
That position has been officially vacant since the end of 2019. But last winter, the agency created a new position of 鈥渟enior deputy director,鈥� which is currently filled by a longtime DFS staffer with a background as an actuarial consultant in the financial industry.
At least three former employees and the union official said they see the creation of the position as unethical and skirting the intent of the legislation that created the independent lab, since they believe the intent of D.C. lawmakers was to have a No. 2 leader at the agency who, just like the director, has been formally trained in forensic science.
The full picture?
As the D.C. Council hearing nears, some former employees argue the lab needs stronger oversight, saying D.C. officials aren鈥檛 always getting the full picture about what鈥檚 going on at the department.
鈥淧eople from the mayor on down have no idea about forensics, and they have the ultimate faith in Smith because she has a Ph.D.,鈥� one of the former employees said. 鈥淭hey need an oversight committee that knows forensic science.鈥�
Last year, when prosecutors first launched their audit of the firearms unit, the U.S. Attorney鈥檚 Office and the D.C. Attorney General wrote to DFS to say they were no longer relying on the work of the lab鈥檚 Firearms Examination Unit in firearms cases going to trial 鈥渢o preserve the viability of our prosecutions.鈥�
At a D.C. Council hearing last month 鈥� before it was publicly known the lab was under criminal investigation and before the lab lost accreditation 鈥� Smith told Allen, the committee chairman, the firearms complaint raised by prosecutors.
And when Allen asked Smith whether federal prosecutors and the attorney general鈥檚 office were once again using the lab鈥檚 Firearms Examination Unit, or FEU, Smith responded, 鈥渁s far as I know, they are,鈥� even providing figures for the number of requests that the U.S. Attorney鈥檚 Office sent to DFS for firearms processing.
However, in a March 22, 2021, letter sent to Allen and others, D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine urged the inspector general to continue investigating the lab and said Smith鈥檚 responses to the committee were inaccurate: 鈥淣either OAG nor USAO has provided notice to DFS that it has resumed using DFS firearms examiners in its cases because we have not resumed using the FEU.鈥�
In a, Smith said she didn鈥檛 have a chance to speak to Racine or the U.S. Attorney before she appeared in front of Allen鈥檚 committee and she said she only learned afterward that the attorney general鈥檚 office 鈥渃ontinues to consider itself not to be relying on our FEU.鈥�
