The Metropolitan Police Department’s internal investigators have sustained accusations against at least 15 high-ranking police officials—including captains, commanders, and assistant chiefs—in a sweeping investigation into crime statistics, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
Kentucky Republican Rep. James Comer, who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that oversees the District, sent a letter dated April 28 to MPD Interim Chief Jeffery Carroll requesting all materials related to the investigation.
“Recently, the Committee was made aware that MPD’s Internal Affairs Department’s investigation has been completed and included substantiated claims against individuals in MPD leadership positions,” the letter says. “The committee therefore seeks documents and communications for its own continued investigation.” A spokesperson for Comer’s office did not return an email. A city spokesperson says MPD intends to respond to Comer’s letter soon.
The specific findings against each official are unclear, and the Internal Affairs Division had yet to notify them before Comer sent his letter.
One of IAD’s findings, according to a source, is that Second District Cmdr. Tatjana Savoy directed two captains to reclassify as many as 390 thefts as taking property without a right, a misdemeanor. Thefts can be classified as felonies or misdemeanors depending on the circumstances, but they are all reported in D.C.’s daily crime report and to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program. Reclassifying thefts as taking property could give the appearance that the crime is decreasing. Total thefts dropped by 10 percent from 2024 to 2025, according to statistics posted to MPD’s website.
It’s unclear how far back IAD’s investigation reached, but accusations that MPD has been juking the stats have swirled for years.
Former Sgt. Charlotte Djossou and former Officer Tabatha Knight testified to a D.C. Council committee in January 2020 about the improper reclassification of crimes. Both women later filed separate lawsuits, generally alleging retaliation and mistreatment for speaking up, along with other claims.
The accusations about the misclassification of crime data, and the department’s response to them, began ramping up after convicted felon and President Donald Trump returned to office and directed his focus on crime in D.C.
MPD Cmdr. Michael Pulliam was put on paid administrative leave in May 2025 while he was investigated for making questionable changes to crime stats, according to NBC Washington. Pulliam denied the accusations.
The Washington Post reported in December 2025 that a draft report from Trump’s Department of Justice found that former MPD Chief Pamela Smith created a “coercive culture of fear” that might have incentivized officials to manipulate crime stats.
Comer’s committee released a preliminary report days later claiming Smith’s “pressure campaign” led to “inaccurate crime data.”
Smith, who left the department shortly after those reports, denied the allegations in a fiery resignation speech. “How dare you! How dare you! How dare you attack my integrity, attack my character! You don’t know who I belong to!” she said. Mayor Muriel Bowser also called the House report a “rush to judgment to serve a politically motivated timeline.”
Shortly after he took over as acting chief, Carroll promised to improve training for officers on how to classify crimes, tighten internal controls around reclassifying crimes, and potentially establish a dedicated auditing team to review crime reports.
The D.C. Office of the Inspector General also began a review of MPD’s crime data collection and reporting in January. That review has not been released.
In an emailed statement, an MPD spokesperson reaffirmed the department’s commitment to Carroll’s promises and to implementing the recommendations from the OIG when they’re completed.
“While we are always focused on agency improvement, our top priority is driving down crime,” the statement says. “While overall crime continues to remain down as compared to last year, we have seen increases in April that require that we redouble our efforts and attention on ensuring our police are firmly focused on keeping our city safe.”
In the meantime, most of the 15 high-ranking officials implicated in MPD’s internal investigation remain on the job. Some of the officials are:
Asst. Chief Andre Wright, who was suspended in March after internal investigators found “inappropriate texts” on his phone; the texts were discovered during IAD’s investigation into crime stats, according to an MPD official granted anonymity to speak about an ongoing investigation. The suspension is unrelated to the misclassification of crimes.
Asst. Chief LaShay Makal
Cmdr. Tatjana Savoy
Cmdr. Sharde Harris
Inspector Michael Jones Sr.
Capt. George Donigian
Capt. Darren Haskis
Inspector Natasha Wright, who is married to Andre Wright and was also suspended in March related to the inappropriate texts.
Capt. Jerome Merrill
Capt. Carline Modl
Capt. Subrena Rivers
Capt. Franklin Porter
Capt. Francis Jenkins
Capt. Rachel Pulliam
Most of the officials did not respond to City Paper’s emails requesting comment, and some of them have autoreplies turned on. (Andre Wright’s autoreply says he planned to be out of the office until Feb. 23, 2026.) Only Modl responded to City Paper’s request; she declined to comment.
It’s unclear what, if any, action the department has taken, and an MPD source says the number of people implicated could grow or shrink, depending on how the rest of the process plays out. That is due in part to the somewhat imperfect and subjective nature of crime classification.
The OIG’s recommendations could also play a role in the final outcome for these officials. If, for example, some officials are implicated as part of a broader system that results in unreliable the numbers, MPD could consider them less culpable than someone who gave an explicit order or manipulated specific figures in an improper way.
Final disciplinary decisions are ultimately up to the chief of police—in this case Carroll—but two sources with knowledge of the investigation, granted anonymity to talk about the ongoing matter, say the mayor’s office has become involved in deciding the level of disciplinary action to take—an unusual step. The mayor’s office did not respond to questions about its involvement in the investigation.
