The Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) allowed two officers convicted in the death of 20-year-old Karon Hylton-Brown to return to the force with back pay, despite overwhelming evidence of misconduct, a 172-page internal investigation recommending their termination, and a federal jury’s unanimous verdict.
According to a report released by the D.C. Auditor, MPD Chief Pamela A. Smith overruled her own Disciplinary Review Division and declined to fire Officer Terence Sutton and Lieutenant Andrew Zabavsky. Sutton was suspended for just 25 days. Zabavsky paid a $2,500 fine and retired. Both were awarded full benefits retroactive to 2021.
The decision came after President Donald Trump (R) issued full pardons to the officers on January 22, 2025—his second day in office. Sutton and Zabavsky had been convicted in December 2023 of second-degree murder, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy to obstruct following a nine-week federal trial.
Prosecutors presented video footage and testimony showing the officers engaged in a prohibited pursuit that ended with Hylton-Brown’s death and then falsified reports to cover it up.
D.C. Auditor Kathy Patterson called the discipline “grossly inadequate” and noted that Chief Smith also rejected all 11 policy reforms proposed by investigators.
“This failure to engage constructively on proposals to improve use of force investigations is a marked departure from the Metropolitan Police Department’s approach over the last 25 years,” the report, co-authored by Patterson and former DOJ monitor Michael R. Bromwich, stated. “The buck stops with her. In this case, the buck was dropped.”
D.C. Council Questions Smith’s Decisions
The internal investigation confirmed that the officers violated MPD’s pursuit policy, provided false statements, and failed to notify commanding officers following the 2020 crash that killed Hylton-Brown. But when pressed by the D.C. Council, Smith defended the reinstatements, claiming the department disagreed with the jury’s findings.
Councilmember Janeese Lewis George (D-Ward 4) questioned how the officers could return to the force despite a federal conviction. “
The pardons are there,” she said, “but I guess the pardons do not change the facts of what occurred on October 23, 2020.”
Smith responded, explaining why the officers were allowed to return to the force.
“They have been reinstated,” she said. “When the incident occurred, they were suspended pending the outcome of their criminal case. As you know that after their pardons and convictions were vacated and dismissed, we completed our administrative review.”
After questioning, the MPD chief also explained why officers weren’t disciplined for obstruction of justice.
“It’s my understanding that there was no coverup and there was no obstruction of justice,” she said, citing body-worn camera footage and internal reports—despite findings to the contrary from MPD’s Internal Affairs Bureau and Disciplinary Review Division.
During a June 2025 oversight hearing, Councilmember Brooke Pinto (D-Ward 2) asked Smith to explain the status of the internal investigation. Smith admitted, “I still have not yet met with the team to obtain what the actual findings are with regards to the internal affairs investigation.”
The auditors reported that Smith never reviewed the department’s own 172-page investigative file. Instead, she relied entirely on MPD lawyers.
“I rely on the lawyers whom I pay to do this job to provide me with the facts of the case,” Smith said. “I’m trying to run a police department. That’s why the lawyers are here.”
‘This Case Was a Test of Whether MPD Would Hold its Officers Accountable’
