The attorney representing Fred Smoot says the former Washington Redskins cornerback did not urinate on himself after his
recent arrest for driving under the influence, but was instead the target of a false
claim intended to “embarrass” Smoot and “sensationalize” his arrest.
The Washingtonian on Thursday broke the news that Smoot was arrested on December 30 and charged with
driving under the influence of alcohol or a drug and operating while impaired. Smoot
pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Phone calls to Smoot’s lawyer, Brian K. McDaniel, in advance of publication were not returned.
According to the affidavit of US Capitol Police officer Seth Carll, Smoot “peed his pants” while being processed at the police station. The urine created
“a puddle on the floor,” Carll said in the affidavit. “[A police officer] witnessed
the urine running down his pant leg and onto the floor. [Smoot] did not express that
he had to use the restroom.”
But in a written statement to The Washingtonian Friday, McDaniel called parts of the affidavit “plainly erroneous and factually unsupported.”
McDaniel said in his statement: “Much has been made of the allegation that Mr. Smoot
urinated on himself while being held in the ‘search area’ of the First District Precinct.
This allegation is plainly false and was included in the report only to embarrass
Mr. Smoot when it was predictably ‘picked up and ran with’ by the local and national
media.
“So that I am clear, Mr. Smoot did not urinate on himself while in the precinct or
at any other time during or while he was in custody. A fair and objective review of
the Affidavit created by Officer Carll reveals that the portion reporting these intentionally
embarrassing mistruths are memorialized in hand writing as an add on to the rest of
the report which was done in type set. (Please review the Affidavit).
“These Affidavits are historically completed by law enforcement officers after the
completion of the processing of anyone who is arrested. Unless Officer Carll broke
with protocol and began to do his paperwork prior to the processing of Mr. Smoot (an
occurrence which is highly unlikely) this information was included as an after thought
and only to sensationalize the arrest of Mr. Smoot.”
Officer Shennell Antrobus, the US Capitol Police’s public information officer, said this afternoon, “The department stands behind the arrest made by Officer Carll. We will not comment any further pending the adjudication of the case.”
According to Carll’s affidavit, Smoot appeared angry during the traffic stop, and
when asked why, Smoot responded that “he got into it with his girl at the club.”
McDaniel also disputed this point. “Contrary to what was reported in the aforementioned
affidavit, the witness was not his ‘girlfriend’ but was a casual acquaintance and
there had been no argument that evening,” McDaniel said in his statement.
Luke Mullins is a senior writer at Washingtonian magazine focusing on the people and institutions that control the city’s levers of power. He has written about the Koch Brothers’ attempt to take over The Cato Institute, David Gregory’s ouster as moderator of NBC’s Meet the Press, the collapse of Washington’s Metro system, and the conflict that split apart the founders of Politico.
Lawyer: Fred Smoot Did Not Urinate on Himself During DUI Arrest
The former Redskin’s attorney, Brian K. McDaniel, calls the allegation “plainly false.”
The attorney representing
Fred Smoot says the former Washington Redskins cornerback did not urinate on himself after his
recent arrest for driving under the influence, but was instead the target of a false
claim intended to “embarrass” Smoot and “sensationalize” his arrest.
The Washingtonian on Thursday broke the news that Smoot was arrested on December 30 and charged with
driving under the influence of alcohol or a drug and operating while impaired. Smoot
pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Phone calls to Smoot’s lawyer,
Brian K. McDaniel, in advance of publication were not returned.
According to the affidavit of US Capitol Police officer
Seth Carll, Smoot “peed his pants” while being processed at the police station. The urine created
“a puddle on the floor,” Carll said in the affidavit. “[A police officer] witnessed
the urine running down his pant leg and onto the floor. [Smoot] did not express that
he had to use the restroom.”
But in a written statement to
The Washingtonian Friday, McDaniel called parts of the affidavit “plainly erroneous and factually unsupported.”
McDaniel said in his statement: “Much has been made of the allegation that Mr. Smoot
urinated on himself while being held in the ‘search area’ of the First District Precinct.
This allegation is plainly false and was included in the report only to embarrass
Mr. Smoot when it was predictably ‘picked up and ran with’ by the local and national
media.
“So that I am clear, Mr. Smoot did not urinate on himself while in the precinct or
at any other time during or while he was in custody. A fair and objective review of
the Affidavit created by Officer Carll reveals that the portion reporting these intentionally
embarrassing mistruths are memorialized in hand writing as an add on to the rest of
the report which was done in type set. (Please review the Affidavit).
“These Affidavits are historically completed by law enforcement officers after the
completion of the processing of anyone who is arrested. Unless Officer Carll broke
with protocol and began to do his paperwork prior to the processing of Mr. Smoot (an
occurrence which is highly unlikely) this information was included as an after thought
and only to sensationalize the arrest of Mr. Smoot.”
Officer Shennell Antrobus, the US Capitol Police’s public information officer, said this afternoon, “The department stands behind the arrest made by Officer Carll. We will not comment any further pending the adjudication of the case.”
According to Carll’s affidavit, Smoot appeared angry during the traffic stop, and
when asked why, Smoot responded that “he got into it with his girl at the club.”
McDaniel also disputed this point. “Contrary to what was reported in the aforementioned
affidavit, the witness was not his ‘girlfriend’ but was a casual acquaintance and
there had been no argument that evening,” McDaniel said in his statement.
See Also:
Former Redskin Fred Smoot Arrested for DUI
Luke Mullins is a senior writer at Washingtonian magazine focusing on the people and institutions that control the city’s levers of power. He has written about the Koch Brothers’ attempt to take over The Cato Institute, David Gregory’s ouster as moderator of NBC’s Meet the Press, the collapse of Washington’s Metro system, and the conflict that split apart the founders of Politico.
Most Popular in News & Politics
Every Bus Line in DC Is Changing This Weekend. Here’s What to Know.
Yet Another Anti-Trump Statue Has Shown Up on the National Mall
8 Takeaways From Usha Vance’s Interview With Meghan McCain
What to Know About the Dupont Circle “Deckover” Project
Bans on Underage Vaping, Swastika Graffiti, Synthetic Dyes: New Virginia Laws Go Into Effect in July
Washingtonian Magazine
July Issue: The "Best Of" Issue
View IssueSubscribe
Follow Us on Social
Follow Us on Social
Related
Your Story About How Pickleball Changed Your Life Could Get You a Game on the National Mall
How Would a New DC Stadium Compare to the Last One?
The Culture of Lacrosse Is More Complex Than People Think
Did Television Begin in Dupont Circle?
More from News & Politics
100 Reasons to Love DC Right Now
How DC’s Attorney General Got So Good at Double Dutch
DC Council Ponders New Way to Expel Trayon White, the GOP’s Budget Bill Advances, and We Found You Some Tacos With Ethiopian Flair
For DNC Chair Ken Martin, the Big Beautiful Bill Is Personal
Every Bus Line in DC Is Changing This Weekend. Here’s What to Know.
We’re Still Litigating “Obliterated,” Apparently; Man Deported After Kicking Dog at Dulles; and “Big Balls” Is Back on the Job
Did Busy Pizza Shops Really Predict US Airstrikes on Iran?
Yet Another Anti-Trump Statue Has Shown Up on the National Mall