By now, I’m sure most of you have seen that the Medical Examiner released Ali Ahmed Mohammed’s cause of death following him throwing a brick into the window of Dc9. Not surprisingly in this case, which has been full of confusion and misinformation, the cause of death does not shed much light on what really happened.
Mohammed’s death was classified a homicide. He died of “Excited Delirium Associated With Arrhythmogenic Cardiac Anomalies, Alcohol Intoxication and Physical Exertion With Restraint” according to the Medical Examiner. Not being a coroner, I can’t really tell you exactly what this means, but my Internet research can hopefully give some context.
Excited delirium is a condition that is normally caused by drug use that leads a person to act with “bizarre and/or aggressive behavior, shouting, paranoia, panic, violence toward others, unexpected physical strength, and hyperthermia.” It can lead to death.
Arrhythmogenic Cardiac Anomalies, as far as I can tell, means that Mohammed had heart complications related to an irregular heartbeat, which contributed to his death. The alcohol intoxication part is pretty self-evident, as is the physical restraint part.
So if his death was classified as a homicide, does that mean that the DC9 employees previously arrested will be charged with murder? Of course, the answer is unclear. The District Attorney’s office released a statement to the effect that they will not re-file charges at this time, but will continue their investigation.
Those with more legal expertise than me have indicated that the results of the toxicology report will matter greatly on any charges that are filed. There is a possibility of second degree murder or manslaughter, but it really remains unclear.
Lastly, will DC9 remain open? ABRA indicated that pending the results of the autopsy report, DC9 may be ordered to close again. I’m not sure if these results merit the bar re-closing, but ABRA did put that caveat in when they let DC9 open.
December 21, 2010 at 4:50 pm
[...] U Street Girl asks the big question: What does it all mean? This entry was posted in Ali Mohammed. Bookmark the permalink. ← Ali Ahmed Mohammed’s Death Outside DC9 Ruled a Homicide [...]
December 21, 2010 at 8:18 pm
I’m a lawyer, and I believe this whole process has been a sham. I have never seen a coroner’s statement this vague. Basically, the medical examiner added statements to make it possible for lesser charges. If any charges are filed, they will probably include manslaughter and assault – but not second degree murder (and certainly not first degree). Exicted delirium sounds very ambiguous. If they had not attacked this man, he would still be alive. That is clear. Yet, they will not get a murder charge.
December 22, 2010 at 9:20 am
To respond to Tony Smith:
Excited Delirium sounds ambiguous if you don’t know what it is, but it’s not. It’s basically when your brain goes nuts because you’re on too many drugs and does things like make your heart explode (read: arrhythmogenic cardiac anomalies). When someone ODs on coke? That’s excited delirium. I suspect the “physical restraint” only exacerbated the condition, because the last thing someone who’s got ED wants is to be physically restrained. They’ll just fight harder to get away, exciting their ED further until eventually… pop goes the weasel. I agree that it’s suspicious that they didn’t say how bad his condition was, but ED alone can be enough to kill a man.
The most important thing I took away from the medical examiner’s report is that it did not say that his cause of death was blunt force trauma, brain hemorrhaging or swelling (which almost certainly would have been the cause of death if he’d been held down and kicked in the face, as at least one “witness” reported), or anything else associated with assault for that matter.
Stopping by from DCBlogs
December 28, 2010 at 1:29 pm
While the road that took us here seems fraught with nonsense, let’s ignore all that for a minute and look at the final result we’re supposed to accept.
The cause of death has now been determined to be NOT blunt force trauma, and a direct consequence of a drug-induced condition. Yet it’s ruled a homicide.
All I can think is, “they can’t be serious.”
Does that mean that if anyone, the police, a citizen, a paramedic, restrain someone who’s out of their mind, and they die, then it’s a homicide?
If an escalator is not functioning, and someone with a heart condition dies while walking up the stairs in Metro, does that make Metro responsible?
How on earth could they say that the cause was his restraint? How do they know he wouldn’t have died anyway? People OD on drugs all the time without anyone else involved.
This would seem to set a rather significant precedent. If the person in question had NOT had the underlying condition, then we can only assume he would have been just fine, and there would have been no crime.
Basically, it means that touching someone could potentially implicate you in a homicide if that person dies soon after you touch them.
There are so many problems here.
December 29, 2010 at 11:13 am
[...] shooting following the funeral of Ashley McRae, which lead to Jamal Coates’s death and the death of Ali Ahmed Mohammed outside of DC9, U Street didn’t have the best year. Both of these incidents were so shocking, [...]
January 11, 2011 at 1:31 am
The family should get the full autopsy and ascertain if injuries were found or observed; if so, there needs to be some re-arrests.