[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
VICTIMS OF VIOLENT CRIME
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2025
__________
Serial No. 119-37
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
61-749 WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair
DARRELL ISSA, California JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland, Ranking
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona Member
TOM McCLINTOCK, California JERROLD NADLER, New York
THOMAS P. TIFFANY, Wisconsin ZOE LOFGREN, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
CHIP ROY, Texas HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin Georgia
BEN CLINE, Virginia ERIC SWALWELL, California
LANCE GOODEN, Texas TED LIEU, California
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
TROY E. NEHLS, Texas J. LUIS CORREA, California
BARRY MOORE, Alabama MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
KEVIN KILEY, California JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
HARRIET M. HAGEMAN, Wyoming LUCY McBATH, Georgia
LAUREL M. LEE, Florida DEBORAH K. ROSS, North Carolina
WESLEY HUNT, Texas BECCA BALINT, Vermont
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California
BRAD KNOTT, North Carolina JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
MARK HARRIS, North Carolina DANIEL S. GOLDMAN, New York
ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri JASMINE CROCKETT, Texas
DEREK SCHMIDT, Kansas
BRANDON GILL, Texas
MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey, Chair
BARRY MOORE, Alabama JASMINE CROCKETT, Texas, Ranking
ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri Member
DEREK SCHMIDT, Kansas JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
BRANDON GILL, Texas HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
Georgia
CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Majority Staff Director
ARTHUR EWENCZYK, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
September 29, 2025
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
The Honorable Jefferson Van Drew, Chair of the Subcommittee on
Oversight from the State of New Jersey......................... 1
The Honorable Deborah K. Ross, a Member of the Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of North Carolina..................... 5
The Honorable Jefferson Van Drew, Chair of the Subcommittee on
Oversight from the State of New Jersey......................... 16
WITNESSES
Mia Alderman, Grandmother of Crime Victim
Oral Testimony................................................. 7
Prepared Testimony............................................. 10
Stephen Federico, Father of Crime Victim
Oral Testimony................................................. 12
Justin Campbell, Officer, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department
Oral Testimony................................................. 13
Prepared Testimony............................................. 15
Michael Woody, Board of Directors, North Carolina Bail Agents
Association
Oral Testimony................................................. 16
Prepared Testimony............................................. 18
Dena J. King, Former U.S. District Attorney, Western District of
North Carolina
Oral Testimony................................................. 25
Prepared Testimony............................................. 27
Jeff Asher, Co-Founder, AH Datalytics
Oral Testimony................................................. 29
Prepared Testimony............................................. 31
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC. SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
All materials submitted by the Subcommittee on Oversight, for the
record......................................................... 66
A weekly crime report for Charlotte-Mecklenburg week ending
August 24, 2025, submitted by the Honorable Alma S. Adams,
Ranking Member of Committee on Education and Workforce from the
State of North Carolina, for the record
Materials submitted by the Honorable Jefferson Van Drew, Chair of
the Subcommittee on Oversight from the State of New Jersey, for
the record
A report entitled, ``New Grassley Report Shows Biden DOJ Sent
Taxpayer-Funded Grants to Soros-Backed, Soft-on-Crime
NGOs,'' Jun. 5, 2025, U.S. Senate Committee on the
Judiciary, Majority Press
An article, ``Are FBI Crime Statistics Reliable?'' Oct. 9
2024, City Journal
Materials submitted by the Honorable Deborah K. Ross, a Member of
the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of North
Carolina, for the record
An article entitled, ``Two North Carolina cities rank among
the safest in the country. Here's why,'' Sept. 15, 2025,
News Observer
An article entitled, ``As Mecklenburg weighs budget
priorities, court leaders barely getting by ask for
help,'' Feb. 19, 2025, Charlotte Observer
A memorandum entitled, ``President Trump's Pardons Cheat
Victims out of an Astounding $1.3 Billion in Restitution
and Fines, Allowing Fraudsters, Tax Evaders, Drug
Traffickers to Keep Ill-Gotten Gains,'' Jun. 17, 2025,
Democratic Members of the Committee on the Judiciary
An article entitled, ``The S.E.C. Drops Efforts to Recoup
Funds From Trump Clemency Recipients,'' Sept. 19, 2025,
The New York Times
An article entitled, ``Trump Oversees All-Time Low in White
Collar Crime Enforcement,'' Aug. 10, 2020, Bloomberg Law
News Archive
An article entitled, ``Exclusive: Federal drug prosecutions
fall to lower level in decades as Trump shifts focus to
deportations,'' Sept. 30, 2025, Reuters
An article entitled, ``Charlotte light rail killing exposes
gaps in NC's mental health system,'' Sept. 25, 2025,
North Carolina Health News
An article entitled, ``21st Century Red State Murder
Crisis,'' Feb. 28, 2024, Third Way
An article entitled, ``The Highest Rates of Gun Homicides Are
in Rural Counties,'' Sept. 26, 2025, Center for American
Progress
An article entitled, ``The Trump Administration's Budget Will
Undermine ATF's Efforts To Prevent Violent Crime,'' Jul.
9, 2025, Center for American Progress
An article entitled, ``What To Do About Crime's Persistent
Perception Problem?'' Sept. 8, 2025, Jeff Asher, Substack
An article entitled, ``Trump Defunds Effective Crime-
Prevention Policies,'' Jul. 22, 2025, The Brennan Center
Justice
A report entitled, ``CMPD Quarterly Statistical Report: Mid-
Year Crime Stats Show Promising Decline Citywide,'' Jul.
17, 2025, City of Charlotte, North Carolina
Materials submitted by the Honorable Russell Fry, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of South Carolina,
for the record
An article entitled, ``After 21 Years as a Defense Attorney,
Byron Gipson Isn't Much of a Prosecutor,'' 2025, National
Police Association
A report entitled, ``The Blue City Murder Problem,'' Nov. 4,
2022, The Heritage, submitted by the Honorable Ben Cline, a
Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of
Virginia, for the record
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES FOR THE RECORD
Materials submitted by the Honorable Alma S. Adams, a Member of
Committee on Education and Workforce from the State of North
Carolina, for the record
Questions for Jeff Asher, Co-Founder, AH Datalytics
Questions for Dena J. King, Former U.S. District Attorney,
Western District of North Carolina
No responses received at the time of publication
VICTIMS OF VIOLENT CRIME
----------
Monday, September 29, 2025
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Oversight
Committee on the Judiciary
Washington, DC
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in
Room 1303, 401 West Trade Street, Charlotte, North Carolina,
the Hon. Jefferson Van Drew [Chair of the Subcommittee]
presiding.
Present: Representatives Van Drew and Schmidt.
Also present: Representatives Cline, Lee, Fry, Knott,
Harris, Moore, Rouzer, Edwards, Norman, Harrigan, McDowell,
Kiley, Ross, and Adams.
Mr. Van Drew. The Subcommittee will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time. We welcome everybody to today's hearing.
Thank you for being here.
A number of our colleagues on this Committee and from the
region have joined us this morning.
Without objection, Mr. Cline, Ms. Lee, Mr. Fry, Mr. Knott,
Mr. Harris, Mr. Harrigan, Mr. Moore, Mr. Norman, Mr. Edwards,
Mr. Rouzer, Mr. McDowell, Mr. Kiley, Ms. Ross, and Ms. Adams,
will be permitted to participate in today's hearing for the
purpose of questioning the witnesses, and they each will
receive five minutes for that purpose.
I now recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Brad
Knott, who will lead us in the pledge of allegiance. I will
then ask afterward that we all remain standing for a moment of
silence.
Mr. Knott. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United
States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one
Nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for
all.
[Moment of silence.]
Mr. Van Drew. Good morning, again. I want to welcome
everyone once again to today's hearing. I want this to be a
good and productive hearing. There are a number of us who are
going to be very candid, including some of the witnesses,
perhaps at sometimes blunt. I respect my colleagues on the
other side greatly. However, I fundamentally disagree with a
number of things that happened that have been highlighted by
the stories we're going to hear today. I do wish that more
Members from the other side of the aisle were here. I respect
differences of opinion, but I think you have to be there; you
have to be in the game. You have to participate. I appreciate
both of you for being here very much today. I know we're going
to have a continuing dialog on that.
Today, we're here in Charlotte, North Carolina, but this
Committee--and I've been honored--has also been to
Philadelphia. We've also been to New York City. We've also
worked each and every day in Washington, DC.
When we went to Philly, we saw a Progressive DA Larry
Krasner allow more than 400 murders to happen that year. His
office dismissed 70 percent--not 7 percent--70 percent of those
crimes.
The Committee has been in New York City, and there we saw
DA Alvin Bragg let crime surge while he focused on politicizing
his office and on politics. He even tried to throw a bodega
clerk in jail that was defending himself from violence.
Every time the Committee visits a new city when we do these
field hearings, which is a good thing to do, the story's the
same. The faces may be different. The accents may be different.
The city may look different. The same story: We're mourning for
innocent lives that have been lost, hearing from families who
have been shattered, have been broken apart, and have been
destroyed. There are no words we can say. We were talking about
it on the bus ride here, a few of us. When something like this
happens to a daughter, a son, a brother, a sister, a mother, or
a father, there are no words. There are no words that I can say
to some of the people on the panel today that ever make it
right. I know that. I never say, ``I know how you feel,''
because I don't know how you feel. I can never know how some of
you feel. I pray to God that I don't know how you feel.
The latest name we speak of Iryna Zarutska, a young woman
with her whole life ahead of her--one who fled an actual war
zone to chase the American Dream. She wanted to be here so
badly--I think some of you may know--that when she was
murdered, her parents requested that she be actually buried
here in America because she loved America so much. What's
perverse about all this: It wasn't in the battlefields of
Ukraine where she lost her life. It was right here on an
American street in an American city.
It's unacceptable. We're tired of it. We're sick of it.
It's sickening.
Ladies and gentlemen, we don't have to accept it. It
doesn't have to be this way. Bad leaders let this happen. Weak
leaders. It's not just crime policy. I'm going to just--the
only time I think today--I am going to digress, but it's an odd
time in American history where we have some really bad
ideology, perverse and bizarre thoughts and ways of going about
things. Whether it was the open borders where we allowed--folks
will say, well, borders are always to some degrees were open,
and we had some illegals in this country. We never had illegals
who were also criminals, drug lords, drug dealers, murderers,
and people who assaulted other individuals on the terror watch
list.
Whether it's children in our schools, I'm trying to paint
the picture of I don't understand what some of the thought
process is and what we're doing in our country when we say that
our children can work with politicians and administrators and
others to change their gender, to change their name, and to
change their pronouns. In foreign aid, when, around the world,
we're spending your tax dollars for transgender opera or drag
queen shows or bizarre studies around the world of prostitutes.
I'm not making this stuff up. That's the sad part. Men
competing in women's sports. None of that has specifically to
do with what is going on, what is happening here today. It
does. Because we're doing things to ourselves as a Nation. That
makes no sense to me. That makes no sense to most of the
Americans that I meet when I'm in any town, any city, or in my
home district. I just don't get it. It's just not natural.
I have to ask, why don't, when we come back to what
happened here to these victims, why is it that some of these
leaders don't show more compassion for--they do show more
compassion for criminals but not the victims.
Somebody came up to me, I was talking with them about this
very issue, regular constituent, and said, ``Why do we abandon
our victims but have heart and empathy for the criminals?'' I
didn't have an answer. What are we doing? I don't know. Why are
judges, elected officials, leftist nonprofits, and activist
groups doing all they can to make our streets more dangerous? I
don't know how else to say it. It's purposeful. It's not
accidental.
Let's talk about why we're here. A magistrate judge let
this killer walk free, even after his own mother said he was
dangerous and that he was a real problem, and she was
concerned. His own mother. The magistrate judge said, ``Well,
this is the 14th time he committed a crime, but, you know, I
think it will be his last because he signed a handwritten note
that he's going to be good.'' Seriously? Are we serious about
that? You're looking us straight in the face and saying that?
You don't need a degree to know that it's absurd. You don't
need to be an attorney or judge to know that it's wrong. You
don't have to have a high-ranking title to know that it doesn't
make sense. All you need is common sense and empathy and a
heart and a desire to see this Nation to be the best Nation
that it can possibly be.
He was allowed to walk our streets. Now, a young woman--and
there's other stories; it's not the only story--but this young,
beautiful woman with her entire future in front of her--working
three jobs, living the American Dream, believing in America--
she is gone. This hearing is not going to bring her back. Your
testimony is not going to bring them back. The good people are
here watching is not going to bring them back. There's nothing
we can do except to make sure that her life has meaning. If it
has meaning, it means we stop doing this, that we stop putting
bad people back on the street.
It's something we can relate to because millions of
Americans around the country use transit every day. Knowing
Charlotte, there's a great group of people who are really
working here to make the transit even better and safer and are
doing wonderful things. We have to allow them to do that. We
need the laws. We need the judges. We need the attorneys. We
need the attorneys general. We need the prosecutors, the DAs to
do the right thing, to do their damn job.
Iryna didn't even speak to this man. Have you ever seen the
video on it? It's sickening. It's heartbreaking. A young girl
kind of tired from just finishing an eight-hour shift. She
slips into her seat and doesn't bother anybody. I don't want to
say the word--this individual comes behind her and just thrusts
a knife into her and takes the life from her. She didn't
provoke him. She didn't hurt him. She didn't yell at him. She
didn't look at him. She probably didn't even see him. She was
murdered. It could be me, it could be you, and it could be any
Member on this panel. It could be your brother, your sister,
your mother, your father, your daughter, and your son. When you
think about this issue, think about it that way. Think how you
would feel if it was someone you knew and loved that was in
your family. We can't live like this. We don't want to live
like this, and here's the catch: There's absolutely no reason
for us to live like this.
When we do this, what has happened in the past in this
incident and many others, it tells Americans one thing,
something they don't want to hear, that their safety and their
values come last. We must be tough on crime. I'm not talking
about minor victimless crime. What I'm talking about is cruel,
harsh assaults, murder, beatings, and the things we know that
are out there. Repetitive crimes over and over again. My
friends and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle like
to talk about gun laws--on legal people, legally owned guns.
I'm not going to talk about that today. This individual had a
problem with illegal guns. We all can agree on that and we
should crack down on those who steal guns or use them illegally
or who are criminals.
Violent criminals should be behind bars. We've got to keep
them there. We've got to stop the cashless bail. We must put
good law-abiding Americans first. You know what? I'm going to
address something else. Because sometimes, when you say these
things--and again, when I got up here and when I got here, it
comes out of my mouth--you say these things, and somebody will
say to you, ``Well, that's racist'' or ``that's misogynist,''
or ``that's Hitler-ian,'' or that's all the other terms. I
can't even think of all the words that dictatorial--all these
words that are used. It's not.
Because here's the deal: Whether you're an African
American, whether you're White, whether you're Asian, whether
you're Hispanic, whether you're gay, or whether you're
straight, damn it, you want to be safe when you go out in your
streets.
Somebody called my office because they were complaining
about trying to crack down on crime in Washington, DC. There
were those that will tell you, ``Oh, there is no crime in
Washington, DC.'' I've had two people on my team in Congress
that have been assaulted. I know a friend of mine who is a
Congressman whose intern was killed. I know that--murdered. I
know that down within eyeshot of where my little apartment is
in D.C., two Jewish--beautiful Jewish young couple that left
the museum--were shot to death. I know that President Trump's
intern had the living daylights beat out of him. Don't tell me
there's not any crime in Washington. I've been supportive.
You should be able to walk the Nation's Capital day or
night and be safe. This is America. You should be able to do
that. Somebody--you know how people call the office. We all do,
all the time, and you talking about the assault in my office.
They said, ``Well, that person from your office shouldn't have
been out at night.'' (1) It wasn't evening; it was during the
day. (2) You can; It's America and if you want to walk around
at night at the Nation's Capital in the evening, you damn well
should be able to. It's got to change. We must return to common
sense.
I want to thank the witnesses for being here today. I know
this is not easy. I can't even imagine. I can't even imagine.
Your stories are heartrending. You're going to share with us
what was terrible and, most importantly, what is preventable.
By your work, your faith, and your focus in being here, you may
save future lives, and we appreciate that.
Their testimony is not just what happened to them; it's a
warning and a call to all of us to do the right thing.
With that, I will yield to the Ranking Member, Ms. Ross.
Ms. Ross. OK. Thank you very much, Representative Van Drew.
Thank you to everyone for coming today to discuss these
important issues. I especially want to thank the witnesses who
have come to be with us today.
Thank you to our law enforcement officers--you are the
selfless men and women in uniform, and you keep us safe every
day.
I especially want to thank Officer Campbell for being here
and what he's done for great city.
I also want to express my gratitude to those of our
witnesses who have lost loved ones to crime or who were victims
themselves. Your courage in telling your stories and having
your voices heard is so important, and my heart goes out to
you.
Before I get started, I also want to express my deepest,
deepest condolences to the family of Iryna Zarutska. What
happened to her is simply unimaginable and unconscionable. I
hope that we will take to heart her family's request not to
remember her by her last moments or politicize her death but,
instead, to remember her as the vibrant and exceptionally kind
American she was. I'm thrilled that we have a picture of her in
that State right in front of us.
Finally, we're here in North Carolina, and we had a tragedy
yesterday. I want to express my prayers and my absolute
heartbreak to the victims of the Southport mass shooting
yesterday. I know our Governor is there today, and I know our
hearts go out to the victims and their families.
The Majority brought us here together, and I would say I
went to the Philadelphia hearing. I've been on the Judiciary
Committee since I was in Congress. To be honest and for our
victims, this hearing is too little too late. We should have
been doing more to prevent crime and address the lack of mental
healthcare long before this hearing. Particularly--
Mr. Federico. Excuse me, this is my daughter. This isn't
Iryna.
Ms. Ross. Oh, I'm sorry.
Mr. Federico. This is my daughter.
Ms. Ross. I am so sorry.
Mr. Federico. OK? This is Logan Federico.
Ms. Ross. Thank you so much for bringing that. Thank you.
Thank you, sir. I am so sorry for you.
Mr. Federico. She was before Iryna.
Ms. Ross. I am so--
Mr. Federico. Four months before.
Ms. Ross. I'm so sorry for your loss, and my heart goes out
to you. My heart goes out to you.
Mr. Federico. How dare you not to know her.
Ms. Ross. We should have been doing things to prevent
Logan's death and Iryna's death. I am so sorry.
To my Republican friends, this is not Democrats' fault.
This is the fault of Congress and our legislature to not do
enough. They want you to believe that tough on crime and saying
``law and order'' is going to solve the problem. They want to
believe that a slogan will make America safe again. If that is
the case, why is the Congress cutting aid to local law
enforcement by a hundred million dollars next year? Why are
they proposing cuts to the Crime Victim's Fund? Why do they
want to slash juvenile justice grants and hate crime grants?
Why are they working to cut Federal support for survivors of
domestic violence, who I hear from every single day by almost
$100 million? In short, why, if they care so much about law
enforcement in North Carolina, are they trying to defund the
police and the FBI behind closed doors in Washington, DC?
The reality is that these cuts undermine public safety, and
they don't give law enforcement the tools they need to keep us
safe. This isn't about an abstract budget line item. The
programs on the chopping block equip and train local police,
provide support to crime victims, and combat domestic violence.
I've got many of these grants for my constituents in law
enforcement in Wake County.
Shuttering and merging vital offices within the Department
of Justice is not about fiscal responsibility; it's about
letting our people down. It's about crippling the very
institutions designed to combat the most severe crimes and the
most dangerous criminals.
A weakened FBI has fewer resources to track and apprehend
criminals. A defunded ATF won't be able to track the flow of
illegal guns used to commit violent crimes.
When you hear these familiar slogans, like ``Make America
Safe Again,'' I urge you to look not at what my colleagues on
the other side say but what they actually do. Cutting police
resources and defunding Federal agencies are not the policies
of a party committed to public safety. The consequence in this
country is that we are less prepared, and we were less safe. We
deserve better. Our police officers and prosecutors deserve
better. Our communities deserve better. Most of all, the
victims of crime and their families deserve better. If we want
to honor them, we should seek real solutions to prevent these
tragedies and not hide behind empty slogans.
Since we are in Charlotte, and we were in North Carolina,
and you have a Representative from Charlotte and from North
Carolina, I have a unanimous consent request. I ask unanimous
consent to enter into the record an article written by Simone
Jasper entitled, ``Two North Carolina Cities Rank Among the
Safest in the Country. Here is why.''
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. Ross. It notes that Charlotte is the ninth safest city
in the country, and Raleigh is the tenth safest city in the
country. While I'm honored to have the Judiciary Committee
here, I think that North Carolina, while we can always do
better, has done better than many of the cities that we have
failed to visit.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Ranking Member. I now recognize
today's witnesses. We will start with Ms. Alderman, and then
we'll go right down the line. Thank you.
Thank you all, again, for being here. Ms. Alderman.
STATEMENT OF MIA ALDERMAN
Ms. Alderman. Mr. Chai and the Members of the Committee,
thank you for allowing me to speak today. My name is a Mia
Alderman. I am the grandmother of Mary Collins. Mary Collins.
Mary was sadistically tortured. She was tortured. She was
brutally murdered in Charlotte, North Carolina, in 2020--this
is 2025 and a half. Mary was only 20 years old when her life
was taken in the most horrific way imaginable. She was
bludgeoned in the head. She was stabbed over 130 times. Mary
then bled out in a bathtub. All of Mary's blood went down into
the Charlotte sewer system.
Mary was then wrapped in plastic and hidden inside a
mattress while myself and my family and then members of the
community tried to get to Mary. I myself was inside the
apartment yelling Mary's name. To no avail. We--I'm sorry. This
is very difficult.
Mr. Van Drew. Take your time.
Ms. Alderman. I have this written down, but as I sat here,
I decided that I needed to go a little further.
Our families have now endured more than five years of
waiting, and still her case has not gone to trial. Five years
is not justice. Five years is torment. Every day of delay
deepens the wound for our family and makes a mockery of
accountability. What makes this even more unbearable is how the
justice system has handled those accused of Mary's murder.
Thank you.
Two of them were released on bond--as if their crimes were
minor, as if they stole a candy bar or maybe broke in a car or
something. One in particular, her name is America Ray Diehl.
She remains free on bond today, despite repeated violations of
her curfew and ankle monitor conditions. She has faced little
to no consequence. We know she has broken curfew, left her
home, pushed the boundaries of the very system meant to contain
her. She basically thumbs her nose at it, which you can see for
yourself on the photos that she posted on social media. They
have now been taken down, but we have copies. Nothing's been
done.
How can someone that is accused of such cruelty walk free
while we, Mary's family, serve a life sentence of grief? The
failures did not begin in the courtroom; they began when Mary
was killed. For days, family, friends, and the community
pleaded for help. Pleaded. I was pleading as Mary's--I don't
know the right word--Mary had a disability, an invisible
disability. If you're familiar with invisible disabilities,
that means that you can't really look at her and tell.
``Caregiver'' would be the right word.
The police department and the detective would not
comprehend what I was saying about Mary and how these people
had her, and they were hurting her, and I needed to get to her.
It was long, and it was torturous to even get him to go through
that apartment door where she lay wrapped in plastic and
concealed inside a mattress. It was eight days since Mary left
home.
When they brought Mary out, it was finally the night of
April 4th. She left the house on March 28th.
The next day was Mary's mother's birthday on, April 5th.
That delay cost precious time, and it compounded the horror of
what we later learned had happened inside. I cannot say
everything that happened to Mary because, if I try to say what
happened to Mary, I will no longer be able to sit or stand.
You're going to have to use your imagination on that part.
Justice delayed is justice denied, and time is stealing our
justice with a backlogged court system for murder trials, and
Mary is not the only victim.
We're here because Iryna Zarutska was also brutally stabbed
and killed in Charlotte. She now brings us here today. The same
system that failed Mary failed Iryna. Our hearts are broken for
her family and her friends, and we grieve with them. We carry
the heavy knowledge of the continued agony--agony that they now
face. This is not just about two young women; it's about the
justice system in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, that is
failing the very people it's sworn to protect.
We need accountability. We need reform. We need to ensure
that those accused of heinous crimes are swiftly prosecuted,
that they're not allowed to be released on bond and just live
their life. They get to go home and sleep in their own bed and
party and have Christmas. I wondered, when they released
America, did her mom get to smell her hair? Did she--did they
wrap her in a warm blanket at night? I think about that
sometimes. Mary being in the ground, in the ground, in the
ground dead. She was so decomposed by the time they got her out
of that apartment, that we never saw her again. We couldn't
look at her. I couldn't smell her hair, touch her face, or hold
her. I didn't know what to do. Was I supposed to wrap her in a
blanket for her to be buried? Or her siblings, they wanted her
to be buried in their favorite clothes. It was COVID. Only ten
of us could go to a graveyard. We couldn't have a funeral. Mary
had no funeral. No funeral. None.
Her murderers have not faced trial. They've been out free
on bond. We had to go to a cemetery where there was a casket
that they told us Mary was inside. Only ten of us could go.
They shouldn't be allowed to be released on bond conditions
where they violate the conditions of their release again and
again without consequence, which is what America Diehl has
done.
The other one that was released on bond, James Salerno, has
since been taken back to the Mecklenburg County Jail.
Apparently, he was maybe too much for his mother to handle. I
really don't know. He's back in the jail now, but he was free
for two years.
America has only spent a year in jail. She's been free for
4\1/2\ years. She continues to violate. We've contacted the
DA's office. We don't know if the judges know that she has
violated. She should not be just free. She never should have
gotten a bond in the first place.
Mary was my granddaughter. Mary was my granddaughter. I am
sorry?
Ms. Ross. No, I was just checking with the Chair about
something.
Ms. Alderman. OK. I'm almost finished. She was a daughter,
sister, family member, and friend. She was vulnerable. She was
also full of life and trust, especially trust that was
betrayed. Her murderers exploited her trust. Our family has
lived in anguish for more than half a decade.
While those responsible have still not faced a jury, I sit
before you today for Mary and for every family who has lost
someone to violence and then has been failed again and again
and again and again by this system that should deliver justice.
I ask you to see Mary not as another case number but as a
voice calling out for change. Thank you for listening to me and
for recognizing the urgency of justice that has been denied for
too long.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Alderman follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1749.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1749.002
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Ms. Alderman. Your testimony--I
don't even have the words--was riveting.
We went over. In order that everybody can hear everybody--
we have a lot of witnesses, and we have a lot of Members today.
We have a five-minute rule. I am going to stick with that from
now on. That's not to be--that's not because of a lack of
concern or that we don't feel for what you're trying to say.
You can't do it in five minutes. I get it. I understand. Just
so that we can get the whole hearing done. We're only here
until I think it's 12:30 p.m.? At 12:30 p.m., they're going to
kick us out. For that reason. It's not me being mean-spirited.
OK. Thank you.
Next, Mr. Federico.
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN FEDERICO
Mr. Federico. First, I want to make sure you all know my
daughter. My daughter was Logan Federico. OK. Logan Federico.
She was in 2022, visiting friends at the University of South
Carolina.
How many of y'all have kids? I'm just curious. Here is what
I need you to do. When I tell you this story, think about your
kids. Think about your child coming home from a night out with
their friends, laying down, going to sleep, feeling somebody
come in the room and wake them and drag her out of bed, naked,
forced on her knees, with her hands over her head, begging for
her life, begging for her hero, her father, me, that couldn't
be there. She was 5,3" and she weighed 115 pounds. Gone. Dead.
Gone. Why? Because Alexander Devonte Dickey, who was arrested
39 goddamn times--25 felonies--was on the street.
How about that? How good are we doing for your family? How
good are you doing for your kids?
He should have been in jail for over 140 years for all the
crimes he committed. You know how much time he spent in prison?
A little over 600 days in 10 years. He's only 30 years old. He
has committed 2.65 crimes a year since he was 15 years old.
Nobody could figure out that he couldn't be rehabilitated.
Well, you have to put him in prison to see if he can be
rehabilitated. Isn't that the idea of prison?
No, my daughter wanted to be a teacher. She finally figured
it out two weeks before she was executed.
I haven't heard a damn word from Byron Gipson in South
Carolina. Not one word. Four months, no communication. His
biggest concern was that he was pissed about my interview and
how I made him look on Fox News channel with Trey Gowdy.
How pathetic is that, that we're letting our 22-year-old
kid--visiting friends--all she ever wanted to do was visit
friends. She literally was executed while on her knees, begging
for her life. Her name's Logan Federico--not Iryna. You will
not forget her. I promise you. You will be sick and tired of my
face and my voice until this gets fixed. I will fight until my
last breath for my daughter.
You need to fight for the rest of our children, the rest of
the innocents, and stop protecting the people that keep taking
them from us. Please, you have the power. We put you in the
power to do what you have to do. We're asking you, we're
begging you all to stop this. Thirty-nine crimes in 10 years--
25 felonies. Can anybody here explain to me well how he could
possibly be on the street? Possibly be on the street? How is it
possible?
I could sit down in a room, and I can explain the whole
process of how it failed; how South Carolina failed Logan, OK;
how lack of communication. What y'all did: You woke up a beast,
and you pissed off the wrong daddy. Because I'm going to put it
out there. I'm not going to be quiet until somebody helps.
Logan deserves to be heard. Everyone on this panel deserves
to be heard. We will. Trust me. My daughter laid on the floor
for seven hours before somebody in that house recognized that
something was wrong. That career criminal, an hour later, went
on a spending spree with her debit card. When they saw his face
on a video, they didn't have to do a check. He was arrested so
many times, they knew who he was. They knew exactly where to go
get him.
Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic that I am here today. Thank
you for your time.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. Officer Campbell.
STATEMENT OF JUSTIN CAMPBELL
Mr. Campbell. Good morning. First, I want to say, for the
record, that I am not here to represent the Charlotte-
Mecklenburg Police Department. I am here to represent myself
and so you can get a clear view of what a violent criminal does
when he's back on the streets.
On April 29, 2024, the Marshals Service was serving a
warrant for a convicted felon for possession of a firearm
again. While serving that warrant, four members of that--or
three members of that task force and one member of the
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department were gunned down and
murdered that day, along with five others, including myself
that were injured.
Now, that day was chaos. Responding to that call, multiple
officers, not only dead but injured, were taking gunfire from
an elevated position by a known convicted felon. During the
process of extracting the officers, I ended up breaking my
foot, which resulted in me being diagnosed with regional
complex pain syndrome. It's a miserable diagnosis, which led to
the amputation of my right foot. I will no longer ever be where
I was prior to that day.
Now, in my hand, I will gladly submit this for your records
is his entire arrest report. In this report, it starts in 2009,
where he burglarized a residence with a stolen firearm. After
he was taken to jail, he was released where he can break in--
where he committed multiple other offenses prior to him going
to prison. He was released from prison and again continuously
committed violent crimes with firearms.
Now, I ask you, why is it that we take people who commit
these heinous crimes, and we do not hold them accountable for
their actions? We sit there, and we try to give it a reason as
a mental health issue or some other type of issues that
realistically doesn't take blame.
Now, the judicial system here in Mecklenburg County, I can
speak firsthand, is trash. I'll say it again over and over
again. I will take the repercussions of what comes next after
me saying that. The magistrate system here has no idea of what
they are doing. This cashless bail system is a joke. I believe
in my heart that, if you commit a crime against another person,
violently, that you should not have a bond--that you should
just sit in jail until your time comes.
Now, there's a lot more than I can say angrily, but I'm
trying to swallow my emotions because I've seen multiple
committees such as this one, and words are exchanged, but
action never comes to it. I'm going to ask you guys, all of
you, to at some point look at us and look at the future
victims--because there will be more--and say, ``At what point
do we hold them accountable for their actions and stop playing
this political circus game?'' I will yield back the rest of my
time. Give it to someone else.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Campbell follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1749.003
Mr. Van Drew. I'm going to thank you very much. I'm going
to take a second just to say, I really do believe--and I do; I
wouldn't be here--that we do want to do something. This makes
me sick to my stomach. I'm angry about it. I haven't lost a
loved one. I can't imagine. The system the way that it's set up
makes it so damn difficult to straighten things out. That's
what each and every one of you are feeling. Because, by the
time you change magistrates and change Superior Court justices
and change prosecutors and change attorneys general--and I can
go on through the list--it doesn't happen in 1 day. I believe,
by the constant relentless pounding that we're going to give--
and we will support you shoulder to shoulder; I'll stand
anywhere--and I know this Committee, at least most of us will--
anywhere shoulder to shoulder with you and make sure you get
the support you need.
It's not a political show. It's not just to get on
television, or whatever the hell it is. It's because I want it
to stop. Because I mean this. It could be my kid. It could be
my family, my wife, my--anybody, all of us. Everybody who's
here knows that intuitively. It could be any of us.
It's not only you. You are not alone. We're sick and tired
and disgusted, and we're going to keep pushing on this and keep
speaking out. We think political correctness is bull. It's time
to do the right thing. Thank you.
Mr. Campbell. Absolutely.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. Mr. Woody
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL WOODY
Mr. Woody. Good morning. Chair Van Drew, the Members of the
Committee, thank you for holding this critical hearing in
Charlotte. I'm Michael Woody, North Carolina Chair of the
National Association for Bail Agents. I come before you today
not only as an expert on secure bail but as a lifelong North
Carolina resident, a father, a grandfather, a former law
enforcement professional who has witnessed firsthand how the
no-cash bail policies have devastated our communities and our
families. It's a shame that we had to wait until August 22,
2025, just five short weeks ago, that Iryna Zarutska, the 23-
year-old Ukrainian refugee who survived a war zone and fled to
safety in America, was brutally murdered on the light rail
system in Charlotte.
Her killer was Decarlos Brown. He was a repeat offender
with 14 prior arrests and released, unsecured bail, cashless
bail on his own recognizance, earlier this year at that.
Despite concerns about his mental stability and his chronic
diagnosis of schizophrenia, he was still released with cashless
bail.
The Department of Justice filed a Federal complaint on
September 9th, charging Brown with causing death on a mass
transportation system. They have elevated his charges to the
Federal level.
Iryna fled the horrors of war only to lose her life to an
offender who should have been held accountable through secured
bail. This wasn't random violence. It was a preventable tragedy
and enabled by the reckless policies that prioritize offender
convenience over public safety.
Here in Mecklenburg County, courts have embraced what they
call ``reform'': Unsecured bonds and taxpayer-funded pretrial
release programs. While studies show mixed results on
appearance rate, the fundamental problem remains: Unsecured
release removes the accountability that comes when families and
communities have financial stakes in ensuring compliance.
Meanwhile, stakeholders report ongoing cycles of missed court
appearances and rearrests. When offenders fail to appear in
court, the courts must continue their cases in their absence
and even sentence them in absentia, costing taxpayers enormous
resources while denying victims their right to provide impact
statements, such as you've heard today. Offenders with serious
mental health issues, such as Brown, are released without the
evaluation and treatment that could prevent these tragedies.
These policies aren't just dangerous; they're expensive.
Mecklenburg County alone has spent $345,000 on local taxpayer
funds for new pretrial staff. They've wasted over $1.6 million
in Federal grants and at least $3.3 million in private
foundation money the county now reports $3.87 million total
they spent to put these offenders back on the street with no
accountability. That's over $5 million to operate a system
parallel to secure bail, which worked effectively and cost
taxpayers nothing and provided more security for families.
This is the definition of government waste. Multiple
bureaucracies and millions of expenses to avoid using the
system that required no taxpayer investment. Every missed court
date delays justice for victims. Every repeat offense creates
new victims who should have been protected. Unlike States with
mandatory victim notification, North Carolina can leave victims
in the dark unless they go in themselves and sign up for the
North Carolina SAVAN Program, which is a victim notification
program. The victim has to do that themselves. That should be
done automatic by your local prosecutors or your local courts.
Contrast this with secure bail where family and communities
are cosigners to create layers of accountability and
communication. When someone has financial skin in the game,
they ensure compliance. When release is free, accountability
and safety disappear.
The evidence is clear: Secure bail enlists families in
ensuring court appearances while protecting community and
families, all without any taxpayer costs.
Members of the Committee, North Carolina's experience
proves that compassionate policies that ignore accountability
are neither compassionate nor effective. You've heard that from
three prior witnesses today.
Federal funding should strengthen systems that protect
victims and ensure court appearances, not subsidized failed
experiments to endanger innocent people like Iryna and these
lovely ladies here.
I urge this Committee to stop rewarding failure with
Federal dollars, support North Carolina's bipartisan Iryna's
Law that targets these dangerous policies, restores
accountability, protects victims, and ensures justice and
fairness. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Woody follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. Ms. King.
STATEMENT OF DENA J. KING
Ms. King. Good morning, Chair Van Drew, and the
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for
inviting me to participate in today's hearing on ``Victims of
Violent Crime.''
This testimony provided to you today is through my personal
capacity as a private citizen and native of this community and
based on my professional experience. My name is Dena King, and
I am an attorney. I have always known I wanted to be an
attorney because I wanted to help my community, serve justice,
and uphold the law.
I spent 19 years, nearly two decades, as a prosecutor,
serving both as a State and a Federal prosecutor. I started my
legal career as a State prosecutor here in Mecklenburg County,
where, in addition to prosecuting crimes, I also worked in our
mental health and drug courts. It was within that role that I
saw firsthand the intersection between mental health and
substance abuse issues within our criminal justice system.
These specialized treatment courts demonstrated exactly what
long-term studies have shown that these courts significantly
reduced recidivism.
As a Federal prosecutor, I was a member and leader of the
Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, formally referred
to as OCDETF, whereby, through prosecutions, I identified,
disrupted, and dismantled major organized crime, violent, and
drug-trafficking organizations. It was through this initiative
that I was able to prosecute some of our State's most violent
offenders, including members of a gang that were responsible
for committing several murders in North Carolina.
What I soon learned, after those defendants were convicted
of racketeering murder charges and sentenced to consecutive
life sentences, is that victims of crime, the family members of
those murdered still need resources to help them long after
defendants are imprisoned. We need more support and funding for
survivors and victims.
What I've learned as an attorney prosecuting cases across
this State, from the mountains to the sea, is that crime occurs
in every community. Crime of any kind is unacceptable. I
implore Congress to work with State and local government and
provide funding to community-based organizations to develop
real solutions to address these problems, solutions that
address the specific needs of each community, as a one-size-
fits-all approach will not work.
Specifically, here in Mecklenburg County, funding is needed
to assist in increasing our prosecutor staffing levels, which
continue to lag significantly behind similar size
jurisdictions. The Association of Prosecuting Attorneys
suggests that, for a jurisdiction the size of Mecklenburg, we
should have at least 144 State prosecutors. Instead, we have 62
State-allocated positions and 22 additionally funded positions
through Mecklenburg County in the city, bringing that total to
84.
The high case load of the prosecutors here results in
prosecutor turnover. The District Attorney's Office cannot
continue to do more with less. They cannot make more
prosecutions with less staff. They need more resources, more
funding, and more staff.
During the last four years in my role as a Federal
prosecutor, it was, in fact, my priority to reduce violent
crime, to remove illegal firearms from our streets, and to keep
the people of the Western District of North Carolina safe.
However, I recognize that my crime-reduction efforts need
to extend beyond prosecutions. We cannot arrest or prosecute
our way out of violent crime. That's why we need to be
intentional about also incorporating violence prevention
programs and intervention strategies, providing resources to
community organizations and stakeholders to work with law
enforcement and prosecutors in a shared commitment to making
communities safer.
The fight against violent crime isn't a fight that any one
of us in this room can win alone. We must join forces--elected
officials, law enforcement, prosecutors, community
organizations, advocates, mental health, and substance abuse
professionals to support each other's work.
Our joint forces are critical to our shared goal, which is
to prevent tragedies and loss of life, to provide mental health
and substance abuse resources to those in need, to hold
offenders accountable, and to provide victims and survivors
with the security and resources they need to rebuild their
lives.
To be clear, addressing and developing solutions for
violent crime is a nonpartisan issue because everyone in this
community deserves the right to live safely. In fact, everyone
in this community deserves the right to live. Thank you for
holding this hearing, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. King follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Ms. King. Mr. Asher.
STATEMENT OF JEFF ASHER
Mr. Asher. Chair Van Drew, Ranking Member Ross, and other
the Members of the House, I am honored for the opportunity to
talk with you today about our Nation's crime trends and how we
can potentially drive them lower.
My name is Jeff Asher, and I'm a crime data expert. I have
worked as an analyst over the last 18 years for the Department
of Defense, Central Intelligence Agency, New Orleans Police
Department, and your Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office.
In my role as the cofounder of AH Datalytics, I have
created a project called the Real-Time Crime Index, or RTCI,
which gathers crime data for more than 500 agencies nationwide
to estimate national crime trends as they occur.
I'm here today to discuss the data which shows a sharp
decline in murder and violent crime in America over the last
few years. Acknowledging this fact does not deny the
seriousness of these problems nor does it imply that they are
solved. Even the lowest U.S. murder rate ever ordered means
there were still 14,000 or so tragedies, like the awful murders
that brought you all to North Carolina today.
Here is what the data unequivocally tells us about our
Nation's crime trends. Murder in the United States fell at the
fastest rate ever record by the FBI in both 2023 and 2024 on
the heels of by far the largest one-year increase ever recorded
in 2020.
For 2025, the RTCI sample of 562 agencies, covering 116
million people, showed murders down 20 percent nationally
through July, setting up the third straight year with a record
decline.
Many cities are seeing historic lows in terms of murder
this year. Baltimore and Detroit had the fewest murders through
August since 1965; Philadelphia since 1966; and New Orleans, my
hometown, since 1970, despite the horrific terrorist attack on
January 1st there.
Chicago and New York City had the fewest shooting victims
through August this year that either city has recorded in the
few decades they had been tracking shootings.
Los Angeles had the fewest murders through June since 1966,
and San Francisco had the fewest murders through August since
at least before 1960.
The FBI has been estimating national crime rate since 1960.
Tallying it all up with this year's decline points to the
strong likelihood that the FBI will report the lowest murder
rate it has ever recorded in the United States this year. That
works out to roughly 8,000 fewer people murdered nationally
this year than in both 2020 and 2021.
It's not just murder that is falling. Overall reported
violent and property crime are both down double-digit
percentage points in the RTCI.
The United States reported violent crime rate in 2025 will
likely be the lowest reported by the FBI since 1968, and the
Nation's reported property crime rate will likely be the lowest
on record.
Violent crime, in general, and murder specifically, rose in
North Carolina in 2020, like in much of the Nation, peaked in
2021, and have been declining ever since. North Carolina was
one of 44 States in 2024 to report a drop in murder relative to
2023, according to the FBI.
Charlotte's trends are closely conforming to both national
and statewide trends, having seen murder increased from roughly
68 per year on average between 2015-2018 to 117 in 2020.
Murder's down eight percent statewide per the RTCI and down 25
percent in Charlotte this year, as the city has had the fewest
murders year to date since 2018.
Violent crime in North Carolina is down 15 percent
statewide and down 21 percent in Charlotte through July, per
the RTCI. Despite falling in the last few years, statewide
violent crime and murder remain elevated relative to the mid-
2010 lows. In North Carolina, they're well below where they
stood in the mid-1990s.
Ultimately, the data is very clear about the direction of
crime in the United States right now. Explaining why crime is
falling is both quite challenging and essential to ensuring
future reductions.
Any explanation must account for at least six factors in my
opinion:
(1) The declines are occurring nearly everywhere in the
United States with drops in every category of crime--all seven
categories that the FBI measures in and all 11 population
groups they measure in 2024.
(2) The declines began in 2023 and have accelerated in the
two-years, suggesting the main causes--or at least the initial
causes are rooted in investments begun in the 2021-2022
timeframe.
(3) Most medium and large cities have fewer police officers
today than they had when murder began spiking.
(4) We have not fixed the supposed root causes of crime,
such as poverty and lack of educational opportunities.
(5) The Nation has more guns in circulation now than ever
before.
(6) Clearance rates for most crimes remain low by
historical standards.
Acknowledging what is borne out in the data, a drop in
murder and other reported crimes, presents a golden opportunity
to better understand why this is happening. The critical task
now, in my opinion, is to understand what is driving our crime
trends down so that policymakers at the local, State, and
national levels can have the tools to better bring about
falling crime everywhere. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'm going to have to leave at
noon to catch a flight back home.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Asher follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Van Drew. Understood. Thank you for being here.
We are now going to ask you all to rise. We're going to
swear you in. You're good. You rose to the occasion already.
Do you swear or affirm, under penalty of perjury, the
testimony you have just given and are about to give is true and
correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief,
so help you God?
OK. Let the record reflect that the witnesses have
answered--you may sit down--have answered in the affirmative.
Please know that your written testimony will be entered
into the record in its entirety. If you weren't able to say
everything you wanted to today, you'll have additional
opportunity. Accordingly, we ask that if you do have written
testimony, obviously, to please submit it.
With that, we're going to begin with the questions from the
Members of Congress, and I will start with Ms. Cline. Is that
good for you? I'm sorry. Mr. Cline. You will be second, Ms.
Ross.
Ms. Ross. Yes. Perfect.
Mr. Van Drew. Mr. Cline, we're going to start with you. Is
that OK?
Mr. Cline. All right. That's great. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I
appreciate you holding this hearing.
I want to thank our witnesses for being here. This is very
difficult, and you are helping us to craft policies that will
hopefully help victims because, ultimately, that's what we have
to keep in the forefront of our minds are the victims.
We can get lost in the numbers a lot of times, but what we
have to do is remember that each crime has a victim and each
victim has to be remembered and have us stand up for them.
To the city of Charlotte, you have a problem. You have a
problem here. You have a criminal justice system that is
broken. I'm not just picking on Charlotte because we've been in
Philadelphia in a field hearing, we've been in New York City.
Any other large city across this country is going to have a
similar problem.
I'm from the Commonwealth of Virginia, just to the North.
You could go to Richmond, you could go to Norfolk, you could go
to Fairfax, you're going to see similar problems. They all have
a broken justice system.
You have to have three parts of your system working
together for there to be accountability. You have to have law
enforcement, who do fantastic jobs arresting and charging; you
have to have prosecutors, who do amazing jobs--I was a line
prosecutor at the county level right out of law school--who, by
and large, do amazing jobs trying to prosecute these cases; and
you have to have judges who are willing to convict and to
sentence these criminals. Without all three working together
aggressively, you're going to have a broken criminal justice
system.
Serving as a local prosecutor, like many on this Committee
right now, we have seen--we've gone in for bond hearings in the
morning and had these criminals come in. You look at three
factors. You look at their criminal history, you look at
whether they're going to be a danger to the community if they
are given a bond, and you look at whether they're going to
abscond and flee.
If any of those are a possibility, you argue against bond.
If a judge thinks that any of those are a likelihood, you deny
bond, and you hold them.
We also had 287(g) agreements where, if this offender was
an illegal immigrant, they were held until their case was
finished and then ICE could pick them up. We need, as Federal
officials, to put in place mandatory 287(g) agreements so that
every jail has to hold on to these illegal aliens until they
can be picked up by ICE and deported.
We've got a broken system because not all of these parts
are functioning together. In Virginia, we had laws on the books
that were presumptions against bond. If you came in and you
were charged with a certain offense, it was presumed you didn't
get a bond, and it was up to the defense attorney to actually
argue to overcome that presumption and get you a bond. More
offenders were kept in jail pending their trial and, after
conviction, were held for sentencing and then were sentenced
aggressively.
Then we had a legislature that flipped, and we had a
Democrat legislature and a Democrat Governor get rid of the
presumptions and reinstate parole. We had the lowest recidivism
rate in the country in Virginia, and that's gone.
Now we have cities, we have counties, like in Fairfax,
where we have a prosecutor, Soros-backed prosecutor, who is
actually treating illegal immigrants better than Americans,
defendants. We have a problem right in our own Commonwealth.
Yes, there are solutions that have to happen on the local
level; yes, there are solutions that have to happen on the
State level. At the Federal level, I believe about 50 of the
local prosecutors here in Charlotte are federally funded.
Well, let me say this. As a Member of the Appropriations
Committee, we need to start tying the money for these
prosecutors to the laws that are on your books and making sure
that you actually impose some accountability here in Charlotte,
make sure that you have the policies in place to make sure that
justice is done, and that these policies are not ignored by the
judges, ignored by the prosecutors, but are actually taken
seriously.
As an appropriator, I'm going to take that back. I'm going
to take your stories back to Washington, and I'm going to fight
for the victims that suffered so tragically as a result of
these crimes.
I want to thank you all for your time, and I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Mr. Cline. Ms. Ross, the
gentlelady from North Carolina.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Chair Van Drew. As a former member of
the general assembly and also a former transit attorney, I have
been an advocate for additional resources for safe transit, for
mental health, for victims, and for law enforcement for
decades. In fact, the district attorney here, Spencer
Merriweather, has also been sounding the alarm for years about
the chronic lack of funding his office has received from our
State legislature.
As we heard from Ms. King, he currently has 84 full-time
assistant district attorneys in his office, many of them
locally funded. For a city the size of Charlotte, the standard
says that he should have at least 144 prosecutors to handle the
caseload.
This chronic underfunding by the State legislature leads to
incredibly high caseloads for ADAs in his office, which, in
turn, leads to high turnover and not moving cases quickly
enough. The State allocation for the Mecklenburg DA's office
has only increased by a single prosecutor since 2010 despite a
20 percent growth in Charlotte's population since then. Between
2010 and 2020, the legislature only added 31 more prosecutors.
We're glad that the State legislature just decided to
include additional funding for ten more, but clearly
Mecklenburg County needs more than that. I would also say Wake
County while I'm here advocating for them.
Ms. King, given the lack of resources the State legislature
has provided to the Mecklenburg DA's office, we're left hoping
that the Federal Government will help pick up some of the
slack--Mr. Cline--and yet, the Trump Administration has clawed
back or sought to cut hundreds of millions in funding for
Federal law enforcement assistance, substance abuse treatment,
crisis intervention, domestic violence, crime victim
assistance, and more.
Can you speak about how ripping away these essential
resources for State and local governments is not just an
abstract budget item, but has a real-world effect on this
community?
Ms. King. When we talk about resources, less does not
equate to more. In fact, many of us in our own general lives,
we say, put your money where your mouth is. Show me where
you're spending your money, I'll show you what priorities are
important to you.
These offices, whether we're talking about law enforcement,
whether we're talking about prosecutor offices, or whether
we're talking about community organizations, they are doing the
work and will continue to do the work. However, they're already
strapped with trying to prioritize what initiatives do they put
up first. Is it training? Is it personnel? Is it equipment?
When the funding is either reduced or cut back or
diminished, that adds additional strains on these organizations
to truly figure out how to best serve. To be clear, these
offices have the goal of public safety in mind. However, being
able to have sufficient resources to do that great work is
vital to the boots on the ground, which are the local
communities that are doing that work.
Ms. Ross. As a followup to that you have a group of
concerned Congresspeople here, including many from North
Carolina. Can you tell us what--because you've been both a
State prosecutor and a Federal prosecutor, what we in North
Carolina should be advocating for our communities?
Ms. King. More funding. More funding to law enforcement,
more funding for prosecutor offices.
One example that I'll give you is any time a prosecutor's
office, for example, is strapped with resources, they are
having to decide whether or not to maybe fill vacant positions.
We're talking about unfunded positions, filling vacant
positions.
If those vacant positions remain vacant, that's more work
that has to then be shared among the prosecutors that are in
the office. That leads to prosecutor turnover, it leads to
prosecutor burnout.
What I would ask Members of Congress to do is to really
look at providing more resources, more funding, in particular,
to our law enforcement agencies, to our prosecutor offices, and
also to our community organizations that provide supplemental
support for those.
Ms. Ross. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, I have a unanimous consent request. I ask for
unanimous consent to enter into the record an article titled,
``As Mecklenburg Weighs Budget Priorities, Court Leaders Barely
Getting By Ask For Help,'' dated February 18, 2025.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. Ross. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. I'm going to claim my time. I just
have a few thoughts here, so bear with me.
Some words were mentioned about the Crime Victims Fund and
cuts and so forth. Let me just point out that this fund was
down, actually, during the Biden Administration because they
failed to collect so many fines against criminals. Good to
know.
Some grant money was pulled from certain NGOs, not-profits,
and I'm going to tell you why. Because they were spending
money--it's important to realize here, money matters. Ms. King,
you're right. Money matters. If you're spending the money on
the wrong stuff over and over again and continuing bad policies
over and over again, the money doesn't matter. In fact, maybe
the money hurts because you're pushing these philosophies and
these standards and what's happening in our country down
everybody's throat, and you got the money to do it. That's not
always a good thing.
More money to really enforce the law? Absolutely. I know
Mr. Cline well, and I know that he will fight for that. We have
to do the right thing.
Some of these we're funding to groups and NGOs that were
pushing the exact opposite what the Majority of you want and
the vast Majority of Americans want. Just a few questions here
that I had.
Mr. Federico, I'm sorry. I don't have the words. I'm not
going to pretend to have the words. A simple answer is what I
need because I want to make sure that we crystallize this.
Should your daughter's murderer have been released so many
times?
Mr. Federico. Absolutely not.
Mr. Van Drew. Crystal clear, right?
Mr. Federico. Crystal clear. Couldn't be any clearer.
Mr. Van Drew. Yes, exactly. If we had more money, she still
would have been released if we had the same policies. That's
the point. It's not the money.
Mr. Federico. It's bad decisions.
Mr. Van Drew. Yes. Mr. Campbell, where are you? There you
are.
The assaults and the murders, what happened to you, what
happened to your colleagues, what happened to those that are
trying to keep us safe, and what's happening to much of the
American public are bad judges, bad magistrates, bad
prosecutors, bad laws, bad attorneys general, letting people
out too early, is that the root cause of the problem?
Mr. Campbell. Yes.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Mr. Campbell. I appreciate it.
Mr. Woody, bail, could we, in your estimation, have saved
lives if we had gotten rid of cashless bail and used secure
bail, a bail that was secured?
Mr. Woody. Absolutely.
Mr. Van Drew. Again, crystal clear, right?
Mr. Woody. Crystal clear. Secured bail--interacts with the
families of the defendants.
Mr. Van Drew. Nothing really complicated. Thank you.
Mr. Asher, you indicated that the crime rates drop, lowest
levels, nothing has happened to anybody. I say this
respectfully. I'm not picking on you. I appreciate you being
here.
Man, talk to these people. You want to come to my district;
I'll introduce you to a whole lot of folks that don't feel that
way. Walk the streets of some of these cities. D.C.--I told you
the stories before--I've got an office there, and two--not one,
but two of my people in my office have been victimized; a
Member of Congress' intern was murdered. People have been
killed and beaten and hurt.
It depends on how statistics are compiled. Statistics don't
always tell the story. Quite frankly, statistics always aren't
accurate. Are we indicting everybody we should? Are we
convicting everybody we should? Are we releasing more people
than we should? That all affects those statistics. I just
wanted to say that to you.
There's concern--and I'm a Second Amendment guy, but I
don't want to get into guns here. We're going after people
legally who have guns and think that's going to cure the
problem.
How about the bad people who have committed felonies over
and over that are released again, and some of those felonies
involve guns? Shouldn't they be incarcerated? That's clear. You
should agree with that whatever side of the aisle, whether
you're liberal, conservative, or whatever.
It's kind of the same theme. It's the same story. I just
wanted to touch base on those few issues.
Ms. Alderman, with you, do we need more accountability--
just give me a yes or a no or maybe a few words--in our system?
Do we need more accountability?
Ms. Alderman. We don't have any accountability, so any
little bit more would be great, thank you, yes.
Mr. Van Drew. Do you believe that criminals should be
released unsecured--with unsecured bond or no bond at all?
Ms. Alderman. Of course not. They shouldn't be released
with bond if they are charged with first-degree murder.
Mr. Van Drew. Absolutely. I agree with you. Imagine, we're
releasing folks with no bond or unsecured bond, even worse. I
agree with you.
Ms. Alderman. Sir, I do not have to imagine. I live here in
Charlotte.
Mr. Van Drew. I know. Thank you. Let me just ask you a
question because you're a very outspoken lady, and then I will
be done.
You heard Mr. Asher say that everything is pretty good,
crime rate is down, the record lows, no problems, and everybody
is happy. Is that your--you live in Charlotte. Is that your
perception?
Ms. Alderman. Absolutely not. I've lived in Charlotte back
and forth during my life since I was six years old, and I'm 64.
I have a very good chronological memory of Charlotte and of the
crime. Just since Mary was murdered five years ago in 2020--and
she was one of those highest statistics in 2020--the crime,
it's just--it's outrageous. Every single morning when you wake
up, someone has been murdered, shot and killed or murdered in
some other way. Other crimes that involve knives, axes, and
these types of things.
It depends on your perspective. If you want to look at
figures all day long, then you're going to have--I'm not a
mathematician or that type of analytical person. I'm telling
you I don't feel safe.
Mr. Van Drew. I know that you aren't. I know that you are.
The last thing I would say--and, again, respectfully, Mr.
Asher--I have a rule when people are talking about what people
are thinking in politics, public policy, and government, to
come walk the streets, walk the streets with me. You should
walk the streets with these people and talk about what's going
on out there.
I don't know what your numbers are, but I think a lot of us
know what's going on.
With that, I want to recognize--who do we have here? Ms.
Adams from North Carolina.
Ms. Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me, first, thank you
to the Committee for having me be here today. I don't sit on
this Committee, but I am a resident of Charlotte, and I
represent this district.
Before I begin, though, I would like to just take a moment
to thank all the witnesses for being here and to say that my
heart and compassion goes out to each of you on the loss of
your granddaughter, your daughter, and for your colleagues at
the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, and thank you for
your service there.
I'd also like to extend my condolences to the family and
the friends of Iryna Zarutska on this tragic murder. It was
senseless, and certainly, we're continuing to hold all you in
your prayers.
No one should feel unsafe in their community or in their
home. Senseless acts of violence have no place in our society,
and they must be met with a commitment to creating safer
communities for everyone. All perpetrators of violent crimes
must be held accountable, and they must pay their debt to
society to ensure that justice is served and to protect our
communities.
I'm a little disappointed, Mr. Chair, that my colleagues
here are politicizing the pain under the guise of seeking
justice when, really, I think there's an eye on this open sea.
That's the real prize. I'm going to just be honest, that's how
I am.
This is why we're here even though we should be in
Washington trying to make sure the government stays open. The
hearing for me is not really about public safety; it's about my
colleagues trying to paint Democrats as soft on crime--and
we're not--and engaging in political theater, probably to score
some headlines.
Now, we don't need to try to distract the American people
to cover up our own failure that we have not had the real
solutions and while we've refused to equip local government
with the funding and the resources that they need to keep
communities safe. We've heard that here. Public safety
transcends politics.
That's why Congress in 2022 passed the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act, signed into law by President Biden. It was the
first major Federal gun safety legislation passed in 30 years.
I'm hoping that we can continue to do some bipartisan things
that will really help our communities and the victims that are
here and their families to solve some of the problems because
there's still a lot to be done.
It was a promising first step. However, President Trump is
now defunding the programs that that bill created, cutting off
resources for school safety, for community violence
intervention and crisis response, for mental health services.
These are proven community-driven strategies that save lives.
Gutting them doesn't make us safer; it puts more of us at
greater risk of violence.
Over the past several years, local officials in Charlotte
have been committed to making the city a safer place, and I
commend the council and those who have been working to do that.
This year, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department's
midyear public safety statistics show violent crime is down 25
percent, including a 29 percent reduction in homicides.
The city council and the Metropolitan Transit Commission
here in Charlotte have doubled the number of Charlotte area
transit system security personnel. Since 2022, they have more
than tripled their security budget from $5.8-$18 million a
year.
Now, I want to say I served 20 years in the North Carolina
House with the Congresswoman here, and I understand the
budgetary concerns that they have as well. In the last several
weeks, responding to the first homicide, the first homicide--
any homicide is bad, but the first one on the Blue Line in its
entire 18 years of running, local officials have taken
additional steps to enhance security in Charlotte's Blue Line.
Governor Stein's budget also has called for more funding to
address law enforcement vacancies and to ensure that we're
hiring more well-trained police officers to keep our
communities safe.
As we are joining this hearing today, I hope that we will
take a comprehensive approach to our conversation around public
safety. That includes talking also about mental health.
A report released by the Department of Justice's bureau
found that nearly two in five people who are incarcerated have
a history of mental illness. The 7.5 people will lose Medicaid
coverage under this next decade if this big ugly bill, that's
called the beautiful bill, it's going to hurt a lot of
beautiful people if it stays.
Medicaid is the single largest payer for mental health in
the U.S., and we've got to make sure that people's health is
cared for.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me just say public health is
public safety. I appreciate the opportunity to be here, and I
yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank the gentlelady. I will now recognize
Mr. Kiley of the great State of California.
Mr. Kiley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to our witnesses
for the incredible courage that you've shown in sharing with
America the heartbreak and horror that you've endured.
Please continue to advocate. Yours are the most powerful
voices in trying to prevent other parents and grandparents from
experiencing the horror and heartbreak that you have. We will
never be able to fully eradicate crime from our communities,
but we can reduce those crimes that result from failed
politics, from radical ideologies, from insane policies.
The reality is that far too many tragedies of the kind that
we've heard about today are preventable if we just had a little
more common sense when it comes to public safety.
In jurisdictions like this one and far too many places
across this country, the sense that crime is just a fact of
life has become far too entrenched; that this is just the way
it has to be. A sense of political complacency has sunk in, to
the point that, according to the latest State of Safety survey
from the organization SafeWise, half of Americans do not feel
safe in their own communities.
This is true--more true nowhere else than in my own State
of California where, according to the same survey, 64 percent
of Californians feel a high daily level of concern for their
safety, which is the highest of any State in the Nation.
Seventy-two percent of Californians say they are highly
concerned about violent crime happening to them, also the
highest of any State in the country.
This is not just an abstract issue. These are the vast
Majority of people saying that they've heard about the sort of
horrors that we've heard about today, and they fear that it
could happen to them or to someone they love.
This sense of lawlessness is seen in the ordinary
conditions of life for people as well. In Los Angeles, the
police chief has advised people, do not wear your jewelry when
you go outside. People have to walk through homeless
encampments on their way to work with all manners of drug use
and other unlawful activity.
You walk into a CVS or a basic store, and your shampoo and
conditioner are under lock and key because theft is so rampant.
We see that in Washington, DC, as well. You will probably see
it here in Charlotte.
In fact, in my own State of California, we just had an
incident two weeks ago where, in apparently an act of
politically motivated violence, an individual fired three shots
into a local news organization, and he was at large for some
time, and then we all breathed a sigh of relief when he was
apprehended.
Thankfully, no one was hurt. The shots didn't hit anyone.
Then, he was immediately released, a man who just fired three
shots into a news studio. Fortunately, there was a Federal
nexus, the FBI apprehended him soon after that.
This is the core of the problem. It's criminology 101, that
the best deterrent against crime is the certainty of
punishment. The way that many of these jurisdictions are set up
is there's various dimensions to the criminal justice system
that undermine the certainty of punishment.
If you're a criminal committing even a very serious crime,
you probably think there's not a very good chance you're going
to get caught because the police departments are understaffed,
and they've been defunded. Then, even if you do get caught,
there's a good chance you won't be prosecuted because you have
these rogue district attorneys who don't prosecute crime.
Then, even if you do get prosecuted, there's a pretty good
chance you'll be let out on pretrial release on bail or even
maybe on unsupervised release without bail. Even if you are
convicted, then the punishments are so weak that it really
won't be much of a punishment at all.
The good news is public opinion has turned sharply against
these sorts of radical policies that have gotten us to this
point. Even in California last year, Californians passed a
proposition to make a crime illegal again by restoring
appropriate consequences that passed with almost 70 percent of
the vote despite opposition from the Governor and the political
establishment.
We also saw some of these reckless district attorneys in
our State removed from office. Because of that, we've actually
seen a modest improvement in crime that is starting to be felt
in our State.
Mr. Chair, this is precisely the time when we can say--and
we've seen it in Washington, DC, by the way, where we have a
controlled experiment going on where you can at least turn a
couple of the levers to increase the certainty of punishment,
and what do you know, crime goes down.
That we need to use that as an example for how we can bring
public safety to communities across this country, and that
starts, by the way, first and foremost, with supporting our law
enforcement. Thank you to all the law enforcement with us here
today.
I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Mr. Kiley.
Ms. Ross. Mr. Chair, I have three unanimous consent
requests.
I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a memo
from the Democratic staff of the House Judiciary Committee
titled, ``President Trump's pardons cheat victims out of an
astounding $1.3 billion in restitution, fines allowing
fraudsters, tax evaders, drug traffickers to keep ill-gotten
gain.''
An article entitled, ``SEC Drops Efforts to Recoup Funds
from the Trump Clemency Recipients,'' dated September 19, 2025,
from The New York Times.
An article titled, ``Trump Oversees All-Time Low in White
Collar Crime Enforcement,'' dated August 10, 2020, from
Bloomberg.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Edwards. Mr. Chair, I object. I fail to see the
relevance of any of those documents to this hearing and the
life of Iryna Zarutska.
Mr. Van Drew. I do thank the gentleman, but it has been the
past practice and policy on both sides of the aisle as far as
entering something into the record, and I understand. When you
speak--and you're going to have your opportunity--you'll be
able to voice that objection and why. Thank you.
Mr. Edwards. OK.
Ms. Ross. Just a point of clarification. All that money
would go into the Crime Victims Fund. That money would go
directly to victims of Federal crimes. By not recouping that
money--
Mr. Edwards. Chair, is Ms. Ross recognized?
Mr. Van Drew. No. I'm being lenient here. I got this
problem, I always like to be a nice guy, but there's a point
where for us to move on--and, again, you'll have your chance to
speak--you'd have to withdraw that objection or else we'll have
to vote on it.
Mr. Edwards. I'll withdraw it.
Mr. Van Drew. I thank the gentleman. Thank you. OK. With
that, I will ask--I will recognize Ms. Lee from the great State
of Florida.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Like a number of my
colleagues here today, I too am a former prosecutor. I also am
a former judge. I know that when a judge considers the question
of pretrial release, there is no more important consideration
than safety to the community and risk to the innocent people
who live there.
When judges fail to consider a violent criminal history or
when they're required to look away from a violent criminal
history, we see absolutely tragic consequences.
Our Committee has been traveling the country to try to tell
the stories of the real people and the real families who have
been forever and permanently affected by crimes of violence,
and crimes of violence that could have and should have been
prevented with good criminal justice policies.
These hearings are an effort to show that these tragedies
are not numbers, they are not statistics, and they are
certainly not political theater. They are real stories of
families, sons, daughters, whose lives are lost or permanently
changed.
As a mother, I thank you for being here and for being
willing to share with us the stories of your families. There is
nothing that could give better perspective on how vital and
critical it is for us to stop soft-on-crime policies that lead
to these kinds of tragic results.
Officer Campbell, I'd like to start with you. You mentioned
that you and your colleagues, the day that you were injured and
several of them killed, were responding to a call that involved
a violent recidivist. Is that correct?
Mr. Campbell. That would be correct.
Ms. Lee. Is that something that was unusual in your
experience, or is that something that happens to you and your
colleagues regularly?
Mr. Campbell. I would say that was an unusual circumstance.
Ms. Lee. Now, in your experience, is there a broader
challenge related to violent recidivists being out on release
before trial?
Mr. Campbell. Yes.
Ms. Lee. What effect does that have on your ability to do
your job safely?
Mr. Campbell. Speaking as a police officer, I would say we
spend a lot of our time chasing our tail and rearresting the
same people that we arrested the week prior while the violent
crime continues.
A lot of crime is stopped just by our mere presence. Our
presence is pulled because, again, we continue to arrest and
deal with the same people day in and day out.
Ms. Lee. Mr. Woody, one thing that you mentioned was the
concept of an unsecured bond or releasing someone on their own
recognizance. Tell us, if you would, your perspective on the
significance of, instead, having a secure bond or detaining
someone pending trial.
Mr. Woody. A secured bail bond, a co-signer is required,
and indemnitor, per se. That indemnitor is going to be a family
member, a close friend, a relative, or someone who has
substantial collateral and something to lose if this defendant
reoffends, if this defendant absconds, or if this defendant
goes out and just thumbs his nose, per se, as the word was used
earlier, to the court.
Ms. Lee. Ms. Alderman, you mentioned something in your
earlier testimony that I think is a really important point for
everyone here to understand. That is that it's been five years
and you're--
Ms. Alderman. Five and a half.
Ms. Lee. --and you're still waiting on a trial for the
offenders in your granddaughter's case.
Ms. Alderman. That, Ms. Lee, is not uncommon in Mecklenburg
County. We are not the only ones.
The murder docket or whatever--I don't know the legal
terms--but murder trials are between five and seven, sometimes
more, years behind. That is outrageous. What the district
attorney's office will tell the victims--they did tell me, and
they have told others that I've spoken to--time does not--is
not a friend to your case. Time only hurts your case.
When you have a heinous crime, for example--because I'm
here for Mary--what they did to Mary, they had the evidence,
they had the people, they had a witness in marry herself,
because they had wanted to burn Mary's body in that mattress.
Something that horrific is just put in line, just when they get
to it.
They're just finishing up 2019. Mary was murdered in 2020.
That personally, to me, makes no sense. Every single person who
was murdered, there should be a swift prosecution, and they
should be prosecuted, and it should be taken care of.
In addition to that, in my opinion, something as heinous as
what they did to Mary and others in Mecklenburg County should
be dealt with more swiftly.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Ms. Alderman. Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. I recognize the gentleman from South
Carolina, Mr. Fry.
Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's good to be here. You
and I have traveled quite extensively into multiple
jurisdictions to see the results of soft-on-crime policies
within counties and within cities. Unfortunately, Charlotte is
no stranger to that, too.
To Officer Campbell, thank you for your bravery, thank you
for your commitment to law enforcement, and thank you for
speaking up. I had the opportunity yesterday on the way up here
to talk to several members, officers that serve this area who
were fearful that if they spoke out or that if I attributed
things to their name, that they would somehow be penalized for
that.
What they have said and what they've said on the phone with
me was really in line with what you've said, which is that
these soft-on-crime policies, letting people out, letting
people back out, and letting reoffenders back out routinely is
a problem for what you do every day. That they don't feel the
support from the city council; they don't feel the support from
the judges on things that they do.
Even your own handbook really ties the hands of law
enforcement and the things that you're able to do, and I think
that's certainly a concern.
To Mr. Woody, thank you for speaking up about bail. There's
a 2023 study in California--Mr. Kiley's State--of the Yolo
County District Attorney's Office where California found that
70 percent of defendants released on no-cash bail went on to
reoffend--70 percent.
The study found that defendants released on no-cash bail
were twice as likely to be rearrested for felonies and three
times as likely to be rearrested for violent crimes compared to
those who actually posted bail. That's in line with what you
said earlier.
Mr. Federico, you and I have had the opportunity to speak.
It's just heart-wrenching to hear and to hear your testimony
about Logan and what she faced. A lot of my questions today are
going to be in line with you because I really want to dive into
this because this is not unique to Charlotte, New York, or
California. This happened in my home State of South Carolina
and Columbia. I don't represent Columbia, but I want to dive
into that.
She was a beautiful young lady pursuing a degree in
education. She wanted to be a teacher. That is the most
altruistic and good profession that is out there, and her life
was cut short. Let's dive into that.
Mr. Federico, your daughter's killer had 39 prior crimes.
Is that correct?
Mr. Federico. Yes, and 25 of them were felonies.
Mr. Fry. Twenty-five were felonies. Did he serve any time
in prison?
Mr. Federico. He served a little over 600 days.
Mr. Fry. If you took all 25 felonies and you took all 39
crimes and he had actually served jail for those, what were his
sentences supposed to be, if you took them all together and you
added them up?
Mr. Federico. Over 140-some-plus years.
Mr. Fry. One hundred and forty years, but he served 600
days.
Mr. Federico. Right.
Mr. Fry. In 2014, he was charged with first-degree burglary
and grand larceny, and if he was convicted, he would have faced
20 years. Is that your understanding?
Mr. Federico. That is correct.
Mr. Fry. Did he serve 20 years for the 2014 felonies?
Mr. Federico. No.
Mr. Fry. How much time did he serve, do you know?
Mr. Federico. I think 411 days, and then he was out.
Mr. Fry. In 2023, he was charged again with third-degree
burglary and unlawful carrying of a pistol. The court's comment
on the public index of South Carolina says that the sentence
would have been five years. Is that correct?
Mr. Federico. Yes.
Mr. Fry. From 2023-2028.
Mr. Federico. Would have never met Logan.
Mr. Fry. He would never have met Logan.
Mr. Federico. Yes.
Mr. Fry. He would have still been incarcerated. What
happened in that sentencing, do you remember?
Mr. Federico. He was paroled for compliance.
Mr. Fry. He served time served, right?
Mr. Federico. Time served.
Mr. Fry. The 114 days pending his trial. Time served?
Mr. Federico. Yes.
Mr. Fry. With a maximum sentence of five years for third-
degree burglary.
Mr. Federico. That's with a felon with a gun.
Mr. Fry. Two years on probation, too, right?
Mr. Federico. Yes.
Mr. Fry. During that probation, while he was out, he
reoffended again. Isn't that right?
Mr. Federico. That's absolutely correct.
Mr. Fry. In 2024?
Mr. Federico. Yes.
Mr. Fry. What was that charge, do you remember?
Mr. Federico. I believe burglary.
Mr. Fry. It was identity fraud.
Mr. Federico. Yes, identity--burglary and identity fraud, I
believe.
Mr. Fry. I know you're not a lawyer or a prosecutor or
public defender, but to your understanding, is identity fraud a
misdemeanor or a felony?
Mr. Federico. Felony.
Mr. Fry. It's a felony.
Mr. Federico. Yes.
Mr. Fry. That's right. How much time do you think he would
have served if he had been convicted of that felony?
Mr. Federico. Probably 15-25 years.
Mr. Fry. That's right. Ten years, actually. Ten years in
2024, he would have never met Logan.
Mr. Federico. Yes.
Mr. Fry. He served 600 days. Why was Mr. Dickey not in
jail?
Mr. Federico. You know what, couple different reasons.
There were a couple fingerprint issues. From what I understand,
Mr. Dickey wasn't in prison because most of his plea deals.
Mr. Fry. Plea deals?
Mr. Federico. Yes.
Mr. Fry. They say fingerprints. Don't you think that the
judges and the solicitor would have had access to other
records?
Mr. Federico. Well, listen, if the person who found out
about the fingerprints issue found out about it in 10 minutes,
they sure as hell could have found out about it.
Mr. Fry. Now, if the judge--have you talked to the
prosecutor, by the way, on the current case?
Mr. Federico. Just once in four months.
Mr. Fry. Who is his name?
Mr. Federico. Byron Gipson.
Mr. Fry. You have not talked to him once in four months?
Mr. Federico. Once in four months.
Mr. Fry. After the tragic murder of your daughter, you have
not talked to the solicitor? We call them solicitors in South
Carolina.
Mr. Federico. That's correct.
Mr. Fry. If the last judge prior to this murder were in
front of you, what would you say to that judge? Then after
that--I'll yield after your answer.
Mr. Federico. I'm not so sure I would say anything to him.
I'm not so sure he would be in front of me. Take a look at my
daughter.
I don't have anything to say to him. What could I say? How
he disappointed me. How he failed Logan. How he failed
everybody in this community. How many Alexander Dickeys do you
think are out in South Carolina right now?
Mr. Fry. A lot.
Mr. Federico. How many in Mecklenburg? Heck, there were
four murders in Charlotte last week. I mean, come on. This
isn't working. It's not working for anyone.
Mr. Fry. Thank you for your bravery coming here today. I
know it's not easy for any of the witnesses.
With that Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. I recognize Mr. Knott from the
State of North Carolina.
Mr. Knott. Thank you, Mr. Chair. To the witnesses here,
thank you for your time, thank you for your testimony. Ms.
King, it's always good to see you again.
Mr. Asher, I want to start with you. You talked about the
decline in the homicide rates over the last time period. What
time period specifically are you referring to?
Mr. Asher. In general, murder rose 30 percent nationally in
2020; had stayed generally at that level between 2020-2022, and
fell about 10 percent in 2023. Last year, the FBI had it at 14-
15 percent. Then, so far the best estimate is roughly a 20
percent decline this year.
Mr. Knott. In terms of the homicides that you're referring
to, what are the overall numbers per year on average?
Mr. Asher. The year 2014 is previously the lowest murder
rate ever recorded in the U.S. was about 14,500. In 2020, it
hit about 22,000.
Mr. Knott. Are you referring to convictions, charges?
Mr. Asher. No. This is just from police reporting. This has
nothing to do with the prosecution angle.
Mr. Knott. The only reason why I'm asking is, you're aware
that it is a homicide to sell a lethal dose of drugs, correct?
Mr. Asher. In this case, it's the difference between a
homicide and a murder. From the prosecution side, that can be
homicide. From the way that the FBI is counting it would be a
nonmurder homicide
Mr. Knott. Interesting. Sure. A nonmurder homicide. OK.
Mr. Asher. Yes.
Mr. Knott. Well, a homicide result--a criminal activity
results in the death of the victim, correct?
Mr. Asher. Yes.
Mr. Knott. Isn't it true that since 2000, there have been
roughly 1.5 million victims who have lost their lives because
of overdose?
Mr. Asher. I don't have that number, but I don't doubt
that.
Mr. Knott. That's not as rosy as crime is going away, crime
is decreasing, correct? That's a 1.5 million, 1.5 million
Americans over the last 20 years who were not captured in this
batch of stats. It's astounding. It's astounding.
You're also aware that there was a leader in the Capitol
Police Department, Mr. Michael Pulliam, who was suspended for
manipulating crime data to make it appear that his community
was safer than it actually was. Are you aware of that?
Mr. Asher. Are you talking about Washington, DC?
Mr. Knott. Yes.
Mr. Asher. I'm familiar with the allegation. I believe it's
under investigation.
Mr. Knott. Yes. It is potentially feasible that the
conclusions that you're deriving taken from police departments
are not the full picture.
Mr. Asher. I believe that it is the full picture. I think
that--
Mr. Knott. I know you do. it's possible. I'm just asking if
it's possible.
Mr. Asher. Crime data is very flawed.
Mr. Knott. You just disregarded 1.5 million dead
Americans--
Mr. Asher. Well, I'm not disregarding anything, sir.
Mr. Knott. --to try to paint a picture that we are in a
safer community.
Mr. Asher. Even overdoses are falling this year. I think
that I can appreciate it--
Mr. Knott. Well, that's because they've been so elevated.
They're falling because we have protected the American citizens
by securing the border.
Mr. Asher. One can appreciate a trend that we are seeing
currently, a downward trend in both overdoses, we're seeing
downward trend in murder, we're seeing a downward trend in
violent crime. While also not saying that these trends are
acceptable, that the problem is solved--
Mr. Knott. When you sit here and look and talk to the
people on the ground in Charlotte, sir, I would submit that
your conclusions are not tethered to reality.
Now, Officer Campbell, I want to talk to you just briefly
about various initiatives. There's been a lot of discussion
about partisanship and how the Democratic party is not soft on
crime. There are some Democrats who are not soft on crime.
In terms of defunding the police, a clarion call for the
Democratic party, does that make us more or less safe?
Mr. Campbell. I would say that makes us less safe.
Mr. Knott. What about working feverishly against long-term
incarceration, is that more or less safe?
Mr. Campbell. Less safe.
Mr. Knott. Mr. Woody, what about cashless bail--again,
that's a uniquely partisan initiative funded by Democrats
nationally, locally, and State level--does that make us more or
less safe?
Mr. Woody. Cashless bail makes us less safe.
Mr. Knott. Mr. Campbell, in regard to the complete
disregard of our borders and our immigration laws, does that
make us more or less safe?
Mr. Campbell. Less safe.
Mr. Knott. What about decriminalizing all drugs--that's a
partisan initiative in some parts of the country--more or less
safe?
Mr. Campbell. Less safe.
Mr. Knott. What about funding NGOs, tens of billions--we're
talking about funding, we talk about mental health, we talk
about victims funding--tens of billions of dollars over the
last four years that was handed directly to people who were
here illegally. Does that make us more or less safe?
Mr. Campbell. It would be less safe.
Mr. Knott. It seems to me that we have an ideology problem,
not a funding problem.
Would you say it's a coincidence that the top ten most
dangerous cities in the country are led locally by Democrats?
Is that a coincidence?
Mr. Campbell. No.
Mr. Knott. Now, Mr. Federico, I want to ask you, there's
been a lot of discussion about you cannot incarcerate your way
to public safety. Do you agree with that?
Mr. Federico. Well, how can we find out? We don't do it.
Mr. Knott. Right.
Mr. Federico. There's percentages out there that after
three years--after three years of release, 68 percent of them
are rearrested.
Mr. Knott. Right.
Mr. Federico. We've got to figure it out first. Put them
there first, then let's do the math.
Mr. Knott. Right. If someone has 39 arrests, 25 felonies,
do you think they've earned the right to be in a jail cell?
Mr. Federico. He has probably one of the best resumes of a
criminal.
Mr. Knott. You think he deserves mental health, or does he
deserve to be in jail?
Mr. Federico. I think he deserves to be dead.
Mr. Knott. Ms. Alderman, in regard to your tragedy--again,
thank you for being here--did your--did the criminal who
affected you--does he deserve mental health, or does he deserve
to be in jail?
Ms. Alderman. The criminal--
Mr. Van Drew. Time has expired, but I'll let you finish
that question.
Ms. Alderman. The criminals who killed Mary are not
mentally ill, so it's not a valid concern of mine.
Mr. Knott. Thank you.
Ms. Ross. Mr. Chair, I have a unanimous consent request.
Just one this time.
I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an article
from Reuters dated September 29, 2025, entitled, ``Exclusive
Federal Drug Prosecutions Fall to Lowest Level in Decades As
Trump Shifts Focus to Deportations.''
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection. I recognize the gentleman
from North Carolina, Mr. Harris.
Mr. Harris. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all my
colleagues for coming to be a part of this. I want to thank you
for holding this hearing here in the city of Charlotte.
I moved to Charlotte 20 years ago. Brought my family here
to become the pastor of First Baptist Church here in downtown
Charlotte. I can tell you that in 20 years, the Charlotte that
we have discussed here today, there's a lot of issues that I
think all of us have recognized. Quite frankly, I'm very
thankful to have an opportunity for us to converse on how we
can make it safer for its residents and its visitors.
All of us here in this room and across the country have
seen the video of the tragic murder of Iryna Zarutska. We've
heard the harrowing stories that all you have shared today.
Again, I add my heartfelt condolences to you, but my incredible
admiration for your strength, resolve, and courage to continue
to tell the stories. You cannot quit telling them. I'm very
grateful for your willingness to step up.
In the case of Iryna Zarutska, Decarlos Brown, Jr., we
know, had a long criminal history. Despite this, in his last
encounter with the law prior to murdering Iryna, Magistrate
Teresa Stokes released him back into the community with only a
simple--and I quote--``written promise'' to appear for his
trial.
Now, sadly, it's all too common for a criminal to be let
off easy by a judge only to have him turn around and commit
even worse crime. You know and I know this is unacceptable.
Officer Campbell, I want to turn to you quickly. Have you
encountered situations where individuals with a history of
violent crime were released and you saw later reoffended?
Mr. Campbell. That would be the Majority of the people I
arrested.
Mr. Harris. The Majority. Thank you, sir.
In your view, how do lenient bail policies impact crime in
Charlotte?
Mr. Campbell. It would increase it because they know
they're not going to be held accountable.
Mr. Harris. How do you, as a police officer, feel when
these criminals are arrested and are shortly released
immediately back into the public?
Mr. Campbell. I feel the Majority of the work that I have
done was pointless because they'll be out on the streets while
I'm still writing the report.
Mr. Harris. Well, in my view, lenient bail policies are not
working in the city of Charlotte or cities across this Nation.
Criminals need to know that when they get arrested, they will
not be immediately released on just an unsecured bond or
written promise to appear.
In fact, I'm going to share a story that former Union
County DA John Snyder shared with me years back. A man was
arrested just over the Charlotte border in Union County that I
represent. Being a repeat offender in Charlotte, he suddenly
noticed that the police car was headed in the opposite
direction of Mecklenburg County Jail.
After raising this concern with the police officer, he was
informed he had been arrested in Union County, not Mecklenburg.
On hearing this, the man began sobbing because he knew he was
going to jail that night and would spend the night in jail.
Jurisdictions across the State should strive to send a
similar message wherever you are. Many of those issues need to
be dealt with by the North Carolina General Assembly, as we've
heard today. I'm glad to see that they're already doing so with
the passage of Iryna's Law, and I'm certainly praying and I
hope all you are urging Governor Stein to find the courage to
sign it into law.
Mr. Woody, turning to you, could you please describe for
all of us the changes that Iryna's Law would make to North
Carolina's system for bail?
Mr. Woody. In accompanying with the Pretrial Integrity Act,
an offender who reoffends is automatically held 48 hours or
until they see a judge in front of a first appearance.
In addition to that, it would recuse the people from having
an unsecured bail. They would be required to post a cash bail,
secured bail through a bail bondsman or a family member with
property or assets through an accommodation.
Mr. Harris. Well, thank you for sharing that. I believe
Congress has got to take action as well. We cannot sit by and
allow these mismanaged cities to put Americans in danger.
In fact, I'm going to be introducing two bills in the next
week, one for accountability and the other for transparency. As
one of them is going to ensure jurisdictions that get Federal
grants for public safety do not defund their police or
implement cashless bail, lest they lose any of those government
funds, and one to require the Department of Justice to publicly
identify every jurisdiction in this country that implements
these cashless bail policies.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on the
Judiciary Committee to deal with these important matters.
In just my last few seconds, let me say, Mr. Federico, how
has Logan's tragic death shaped your view of the criminal
justice system?
Mr. Federico. Very disappointing. When criminals have more
rights and are respected more than an innocent young woman at
age 22, it should send a shockwave to everyone, to everyone.
Mr. Harris. Absolutely. Well, again, let me just say thank
you to all of you for sharing your stories. Please keep sharing
your story.
With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. I now recognize Mr. Moore from the
great State of North Carolina.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the
Committee for being here today. I am proud to represent
Charlotte and Congress, part of Charlotte, and while I'm glad
that the Committee is here, I certainly hate the circumstances
under which that the Committee has to be here.
To our witnesses here, I have no words. Some of you I have
talked to before, some this is the first time. The tragic
deaths that you all have discussed, that you are living
through, Officer Campbell, your injuries, are things that
should never ever have happened.
I do want to push back on some of the arguments that this
is a money issue. This is not a money issue. This is a policy
issue. This is a choice that is made often by magistrates, and
I can give you some examples, one as recent as just a couple
weeks ago.
Two of the district attorneys in two of the neighboring
counties I represent, Travis Page from Gaston County, Mike
Miller from Cleveland County, are here. I can tell you a story
that I think is very telling. This happened just September 3rd,
so this is very recent.
A guy by the name of John Alexander was accused of breaking
into a Belmont Abbey College dorm room and sexually assaulting
a student. That happened in Gaston County. However, he was
initially arrested here in Mecklenburg County. Guess what his
bond was, Mr. Chair? Here the bond was set at $50,000. He made
bond. Once the case got transferred over to Gaston County, the
district attorney and the judge there raised the bond to
$500,000 so that this person will be incarcerated.
That's an example from just a few weeks ago right here
showing the difference. The fact that you have this pattern
happening right here, and the two counties that I hear about
the most--the complaints about are Mecklenburg County and
Durham County. Those are the two that I hear about most often
when I talk to law enforcement officials all around the State.
That it's just--it all tends to come down to--frankly, here
in Mecklenburg the criticism has not been with the district
attorney. It's been more with the magistrates and the judges.
Just let these criminals come in and go right out the door.
Officer Campbell, you just testified there are times when
you're still doing the paperwork and the criminal is walking
back out on the street. Is that correct?
Mr. Campbell. That would be correct.
Mr. Moore. Just curious, is that more often than not, or is
that just kind of a rare thing?
Mr. Campbell. No. It happens quite frequently.
Mr. Moore. That should shock everyone. That should drive
the point home that this is not about money or programs or
whatever else and some of these feel-good programs that get
kicked around out there to try to divert people from jail.
There are people who are dangerous, and they need to be
incarcerated.
I'll tell you the other problem that we have, and that is
the lawsuit a couple decades ago, I think the ACLU filed,
wanted to get folks--deinstitutionalize folks with serious
mental issues. Well, guess what you have now? You have people
out on the streets and your homeless problem has gone through
the roof. You can't go anywhere without seeing homeless
encampments. Even in my small town of Kings Mountain where this
is happening, it's happening all over the country.
It's because of these Leftist policies of trying to get
people deinstitutionalized who have mental issues. Some people
need to be in the community. Guess what? There are dangerous
people who should not have been in the community.
I point to the situation with Iryna Zarutska. Not only
should this guy not have been out on bond from previous things,
but why didn't somebody involuntarily commit this guy, right?
This guy--whatever you want to say, this guy should not have
been on the streets.
These policies have to change. Guess what? It's a question
of what's happened when it comes to judicial officials around
because you don't hear this as much in some of the other
counties. You've got a data pool that you can look at.
For those who are here in the public, you've got two
neighboring district attorneys sitting out in the audience
today. Talk to them after the hearing. Get them to talk to you
about what the stats look like in their counties.
I want these victims' families to know that you were not
done properly. Your loved ones were not provided justice. That
has to change.
To the family of Iryna Zarutska, I have had the opportunity
to speak with her uncle--absolutely tragic. Leaving a war-torn
country, coming here, starting over, only to be murdered by
some animal who should have been behind bars on this light
rail. Just unspeakable.
I just want these family members to know, I want her family
members to know--Officer Campbell who now lives with a
disability because I want you to know--that these stories are
in vain and that change has to come.
I appreciate your courage in being here today. I appreciate
the message that's being set forth. Mr. Chair, I appreciate
this Committee going around the country. Because the American
people are sick and tired of this. It has to change, and it's
going to change. With that I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields, and I thank the
gentleman. I recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr.
Rouzer.
Mr. Rouzer. I thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank you for allowing those of us who are not on
the Judiciary Committee to join you here today. My primary
Committee assignments are transportation and infrastructure and
agriculture and science and technology. First, I want to tell
each of you my heart, boy, my heart really goes out to you. It
is unbelievable what you have had to endure. I can tell you
that all of us here have been working very, very hard to make
sure that justice is achieved. It may take a little bit, but
we're going to work hard.
I also want to acknowledge that my mind and heart are with
my friends in our community of Southport, which is in my
district. It strikes me that we have a real issue of a moral--
of what I'll call a moral and spiritual crisis in this country
that needs to be addressed as part of the big picture as well.
Given my role on the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee, where I'm the Chair of Highways and Transit, we're
in the process of writing a highway bill, for lack of a better
way to put it, and that's going to include an opportunity to
make modifications to our transit programs. One of the things
that I've observed through my research that is really
interesting to me and quite appalling is fare avoidance. Folks
get on these light rails, and they're not paying any fare
whatsoever. That was the case with the murder here in Charlotte
a few weeks ago.
Mr. Campbell, if I can ask you, is that something that you
personally witnessed a good little bit? Is it lack of resources
or lack of commitment to police these light rail cars and make
sure people are paying their fares?
Mr. Campbell. Well, the light rail system is controlled by
CATS, and they employ their own security.
Mr. Rouzer. Right.
Mr. Campbell. More cops to me would not be the answer. I
mean CATS can control their own fares. There's never been a
system that checks to see if they paid their fare or not in the
first place.
Mr. Rouzer. Yes. Well, one of the fundamental principles is
you get more of whatever you're going to incentivize. If people
do bad and they're not reprimanded--if there's no consequence--
they're going to continue to avoid paying any fare. That's
definitely an issue that we'll look at in the context of our
highway bill.
I know we have some great and fine citizens of this
community, David Longo, and many other business leaders who are
working to enhance the community here for the future and are
working on those specific issues. I appreciate them for their
commitment and dedication to it.
When you have public transportation systems that the
average person does not want to ride, that makes it very, very
difficult to keep them financially viable and sound, and of
course, as you know, really a problem for the community as a
whole. Because, after all taxpayers are paying for them.
Let me ask you, Mr. Woody, switching gears a little bit. I
am just curious about your thoughts on this. Do you think
magistrate judges are under political or institutional pressure
to release offenders with minimal bail even in violent cases?
Mr. Woody. Magistrate officials are given a bail schedule.
Whether they adhere to that bail schedule or not, that can be
under their own accord.
Mr. Rouzer. Let me also--Mr. Campbell, back to you. Based
on your experience in law enforcement, have you observed a
correlation between the implementation or more lenient criminal
justice policies and an increase in violent crime in the
Charlotte region?
Mr. Campbell. Yes.
Mr. Rouzer. Unequivocally yes.
Mr. Campbell. Yes.
Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. I thank the gentleman.
Ms. Ross. Mr. Chair, I have a unanimous consent request. I
ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an article
written by Rachel Crumpler and Taylor Knopf, titled,
``Charlotte Light Rail Killing Exposes Gaps in NC's Mental
Health System,'' published by the NC Health News on September
25, 2025.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
I also have a couple of UCs. One is this new Senate
Judiciary Report, the Grassley report, which shows ``Biden DOJ
Sent Taxpayer-Funded Grants to Soros-backed, Soft-On-Crime
NGOs.'' That money, your tax money actually went there.
I also have another unanimous consent, from the City
Journal, ``Are Crime Statistics Reliable?'' The ``Agency's''--
from that article--``Process is shrouded in mystery, and its
numbers are often inconsistent and inaccurate.''
With that, I will recognize the gentleman from North
Carolina, Mr. Edwards.
Mr. Edwards. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Again, I
appreciate the opportunity to be waived on to this Committee to
visit Charlotte and to hear from this fine panel of witnesses.
To each of you, thank you for being here. Thank you for
your courage. I want to apologize to you, first. I find it
interesting that we've heard, in many situations from the folks
that have talked today, efforts to distract us from what the
actual issues are. Efforts to create diversions from the
horrible stories that we've heard from our witnesses here
today.
We've heard this issue politicized with documents that have
been entered that have absolutely nothing to do with the
relevance of your stories. I apologize to you for that.
Frankly, I'm embarrassed that way too many times this is the
way Congress operates. I can promise you that, while this
behavior might be taking place up here with this panel, your
stories have resonated with every Member that's up here. We
will remember these when we get back to Washington, DC.
I apologize that we're hearing from folks that just say,
``Give me more money, and I'll fix the problem.'' That's
typically what we hear with about any problem that I face in
Washington, DC--``Give me more money, and then I'll fix it.''
If there's anybody here that believes that simply reaching
deeper into their pockets will fix this problem, please leave a
collection over here in front of Ms. Ross before you leave
today. We've heard that less guns on the streets by law-abiding
citizens would fix this problem.
Ms. Alderman, let me ask you, would less guns on the
streets by law-abiding citizens, would that have saved Mary's
life?
Ms. Alderman. No, not in Mary's case. Absolutely not.
Mr. Edwards. It wouldn't.
I ask you, Mr. Woody, while, no, I don't think anybody here
is an expert on Iryna Zarutska, do you believe that less guns
on the streets by law-abiding citizens would have saved her
life?
Mr. Woody. Absolutely not.
Mr. Edwards. Yet, we're turning our conversations toward
those types of things. We've heard up here that Charlotte has
the eighth safest crime rate--an eighth best crime rate in the
country.
Ms. Alderman, do you take solace in knowing that somebody
wrote an article that Charlotte has the eighth best in the
country? Does that help you?
Ms. Alderman. I don't care.
Mr. Edwards. Exactly. That has nothing to do with us saving
Mary's life.
Ms. Alderman. It's completely irrelevant
We heard here that--I think it was Ms. Adams that mentioned
there's been a 25-percent reduction in violent crime. I think
we heard something similar from Mr. Asher.
Mr. Woody--well, I'll ask Mr. Federico. A reduction of 25
percent, does that give you any solace?
Mr. Federico. I'd like to see where it was. It certainly
wasn't in our daughter's case; I can tell that you right now.
Mr. Edwards. We heard up here that we should feel
comfortable that, in 2022, Biden signed the Bipartisan
Communities Act.
Mr. Federico, do you take any solace in that? Does that
give you any comfort at all?
Mr. Federico. No. There's only one thing that would have
kept my daughter alive, and that would have been keeping a
career criminal in prison.
Mr. Edwards. Exactly. I apologize to you. There's been so
many distractions to what the conversation really should be up
here.
We've heard a number of times that there's a failure of
policy. I can buy that in some cases. Definitely, we need to
eliminate cashless bail. That's a policy that we should go
after. I would suggest, more than policy and more policy. We
need transparency, and we need accountability to the people
that are charged with implementing those policies.
Mr. Woody, I'm about to run out of time. I know you're
probably not an expert on the court system--by the way, thank
you for your service in law enforcement, most of which I
understand is in my district. Thank you.
Mr. Woody. Thank you.
Mr. Edwards. How are magistrates selected in North
Carolina?
Mr. Woody. Magistrates are appointed.
Mr. Edwards. They're appointed by?
Mr. Woody. The chief superior court judge.
Mr. Edwards. Which are selected?
Mr. Woody. They're elected. Superior court judges are
elected.
Mr. Edwards. What I hear you saying is that we as citizens,
communities, can elect folks to implement those policies. It
may be that we need more policies or more reporting to make
accountability a bit more transparent.
I'm out of time. I can go on with this forever. Thank you
all. I appreciate you being here.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields. I thank the gentleman.
I recognize Mr. Harrigan from North Carolina.
Mr. Harrigan. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses today. I generally appreciate
your heartfelt testimony. It is something, as Mr. Edwards has
said, that will resonate with all of us forever. You have that
commitment from us.
I find it personally disgusting that Members of this
Committee have suggested that this is political theater for the
purpose of negotiating an open seat while distracting from the
fact that violent repeat offenders are continually let free
from our judicial system. That is the problem that we have.
That is only the problem that we have, period.
We talked a lot about money today. I will actually give DA
Merriweather some credit. He got together with local business
leaders and local government officials to decide, OK, hey, what
is the minimum amount that we actually really need to get the
job done? Because from his words he said, ``I don't want to
throw money at this problem because the problem really isn't
money.'' Out of the ten additional DAs that he needs with five
additional staff assistants, that's exactly what the State
legislature has authorized. It's just waiting on Governor
Stein's signature to be put into law. That's happening.
We've got to understand that the lack of ten DAs in a
system that has 84 DAs already is not problem. It's mutually
exclusive from the problem of judicial posture with respect to
judges and magistrates simply allowing violent repeat criminals
back on our streets, as well as trial delays, which, as we all
know, over the course of time, we lose witnesses; we lose
accuracy of testimony. It degrades the system of justice that
we have. We cannot allow this to continue to stand.
What I find absolutely indefensible is politicizing this
Committee, testimony here today, in front of these victims and
the families of these victims, saying that this is for
political purposes.
Mr. Asher talked about statistics today. The statistics
that he entered into his testimony today about declining crime
are only through June 2025. It does not talk about July,
August, or September. You know what's happened in July, August,
and September? The murder rate has skyrocketed in Charlotte. We
are picking and choosing what type of statistics we want to
share to forge a narrative that is detached from reality. That
narrative does not line up to the experience of Officer
Campbell, Mr. Federico, and Ms. Alderman. Let us not forget
that.
One of my Democratic colleagues said, ``Don't judge us by
what we say but what we do,'' with respect to money.
Let me be very clear, the sole force behind defunding the
police has been the Democratic Party, period. They have created
unrest. They have created a desire within our population to not
step up and serve in law enforcement.
I had a long meeting with Johnny Jennings, the former Chief
of Police and CMPD, and I asked for a meeting. I said, ``What's
working; what's not working? I want to go through everything so
that I might be able to help you.'' At the end of what was
supposed to be a 45-minute meeting that actually lasted 3\1/2\
hours, he said, ``Mr. Harrigan, I just want to thank you.'' I
said, ``Why, Chief?'' He said, ``Because not one time in my
entire career, 30 years, has an elected official asked to talk
to me about what's working, what's not working, and to let me
know that they had my back.'' Not one member of the Charlotte
City Council, not one member of the Mecklenburg County
Commission, not the mayor, not a single Congressperson had ever
come before him and asked, ``How can we help?'' as opposed to
just absolutely running him through the mud when things didn't
go their way in traditional media.
Guys, we have a problem here. We have a very real problem
that we need to work together to solve. We have to understand
what is the root of this problem. It is, as Mr. Moore said,
``it is not money, it is poor policy built on poor principle
that is leading us down the road to failed outcomes.'' We have
failed leaders who are leading us down the road to failed
outcomes. It's their kids that pay the price. That's got to
stop.
I've got a daughter, two daughters, Raegan and McKinley,
they're six and eight. God forbid, if something like that ever
happened to them, I could not be a civil citizen. Mr. Federico,
I thank you for your restraint today. God bless you. I yield
back.
Mr. Federico. Thank you.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields. I recognize Mr. Schmidt
from the great State of Kansas.
Mr. Schmidt. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank all our
witnesses, but particularly the family members who are the
victims themselves in the case of Officer Campbell.
I have not met any of you personally prior to today, but I
feel like I know you. I've spent 12 years as attorney general
in our State. I've spent a lot of time with families who have
lost everything. I always made a point to sit down with
families before we make charging decisions or plea decisions or
management decisions on a case, because I thought that it was
important to understand as we were acting on behalf of the
State of Kansas within the boundaries of the law and the
evidence that was in front of us.
I want to thank you for stepping forward and expressing my
unbelievable sorrow with you, even though we have not met
before today.
I don't know how it is here in North Carolina. I'm learning
how it is in Washington, DC, when we debate criminal justice
policy. I'll tell you how it was in Kansas for a lot of years
when I served in public policy roles.
Our legislature would say all the right things, including
me, when I was serving there. Then, it would come crunch time,
and it was time to make numbers fit, and it was budget time. We
always ended up in a public safety context in a conversation
about dead space in our prisons and the cost-managing inmates
or offenders on the back end. Then we had very smart people--
and I say this genuinely--Mr. Asher and I have not met before.
I've heard his presentation to a lot of smart folks who sit and
crunch numbers who tell us how to back into public safety
decisions. Then, we would make those decisions, and I would
often vote against them because it ended up with the decision
being that you had decided how many people you were willing to
pay to correct. You were deciding who went to the top of the
list to be correct. Everybody else wound up on early release.
They wound up on work release. Perhaps they wound up with a
cashless bail option. We didn't have that in Kansas. We
repelled that.
I always thought that was backward. I always thought you
ought to sit down with individuals who had lost a loved one or
who were themselves victims of crime, you ought to make policy
decisions based on what you thought justice was in an
individual case. Then you ought to make resource decisions
based on what your policy decisions were on what justice
demanded. I thought that was correct, even as a fiscally
conservative guy, because I think public safety is a core
function of State and local government and the Federal
Government within our boundaries.
I guess I would just ask--I am going to start with Ms. King
because she's worked the system as a prosecutor. Do you share
that general philosophy that we ought to decide who we need off
the streets first, and then figure out what it costs as opposed
to deciding how much we're willing to spend, and then figure
out who we can get off the streets with the resources
available?
Ms. King. The criminal justice system is--depending on who
commits the crime. Who commits the crime is who the resources,
whether that's investigation or prosecutorial, that's how those
resources are allocated, working cases against the individuals
that commit the crime.
Mr. Schmidt. Officer Campbell, how about you? You've seen
both sides of the system now.
Mr. Campbell. I don't know. Because I don't know where you
want me to begin.
Mr. Schmidt. Wherever you think is appropriate.
Mr. Campbell. We sit here and reallocate funds, time, and
equipment to arresting one person. Go through the system,
they're already back out. They commit another crime before they
have their court case. Now, you have two court cases. It just
keeps piling up. That would be my experience in this whole
thing.
Mr. Schmidt. Mr. Woody, you deal with a particular slice of
the offender population at a particular moment in time. Any
thoughts on that general approach?
Mr. Woody. The general approach would be that there has to
be some sort of accountability for the offender. We start with
the accountability of the date of arrest, and the
accountability follows him throughout the duration of the
charge, so the snowball effect doesn't begin.
Cashless bail has no accountability for the offender.
They're released 1-3 days with no consequences versus secured
bail. If they go through a secured bail process, they have
family, someone for collateral, someone with skin in the game
to verify the takeover to the court system.
Mr. Schmidt. Mr. Federico.
Mr. Federico. The safety of the community has to come
first. If that is putting somebody in prison right away and not
letting them go until it's ready as far as their hearing--you
have to think of the community first. Nobody thought of the
community first--39 arrests, 25 felonies. Come on. Seriously.
Who can possibly explain that to me? No.
It has to be--you put them in there; we'll worry about it
later. We'll figure it out. Simple as that.
Mr. Schmidt. Amen, sir. I believe I'm out of time. I would
ask Ms. Alderman, but I'll leave it to the Chair on that.
Mr. Van Drew. I thank the gentleman, both of you actually.
I mean, getting my place here.
Yes, Mr. McDowell. I recognize Mr. McDowell, the gentleman
from North Carolina.
Mr. McDowell. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to each of the witnesses for being here today. I
want to first address something that one of my colleagues said
to begin this hearing, which was that apparently all the folks
on the Republican side are here to talk about catchy slogans,
and that's what we care about. I take offense to that and it's
wrong. It needs to be called out because, nine months ago, I
was sworn in to serve as a Member of Congress. The only reason
that I ran for Congress was because my little brother is one of
those statistics that Mr. Asher failed to mention. He was
killed by fentanyl poisoning. This is not a statistic for me.
This is not a catchy slogan. What this is, is a way for me to
get up and do something about it. I wouldn't be in Congress
were it not for failed policies of Democrat politicians that
left our border wide open. I take offense to what my colleagues
said at the beginning of this meeting that all we care about is
catchy slogans. Because it's wrong.
I know firsthand, Mr. Federico, what it's like to see that
picture, a picture of a lost loved one that drives you and that
motivates you. In my office, I keep a picture of my brother
that I have to see every single day before I go to vote, so I
remember why I'm here. Every day, when I see him, I will see
Logan. Because that's why I'm here. I am here to do something
about it. We're all here to do something about it because we
cannot let these beautiful people that are murdered by
dangerous criminals, who have been in and out of custody but
never actually put in a box where they belong. We can't do
nothing.
There's been a lot of conversation today about funding and
mental health. My wife is a therapist. As good as she is, I
don't think an hour a week with my wife would have saved Iryna.
Because I don't think that would have saved Decarlos Brown's
mental health. No. He's an animal. He's a criminal, and that is
obvious from the horrific video that we saw. He belongs in a
jail cell. It is a failure--I won't even call them leaders
because they're not leaders. Because leaders would have made
sure that he was in prison. They're elected officials that
didn't do their job, and they need to be called out for it.
I hate that Mr. Asher is not here to talk about the rosy
statistics that he offered us today, but I don't think that
those rosy statistics really do anything for victims' families.
Mr. Federico, I have a question for you. Did the statistics
that Mr. Asher shared with us today, do they do anything to
ease your pain?
Mr. Federico. I think they're crap.
Mr. McDowell. I concur. Unfortunately, for the narrative
that my friends on the other side of the aisle are trying to
paint, I'm going to yield the rest of my time to Representative
Knott to continue his questioning.
Mr. Knott. Thank you, Representative McDowell. It's
alarming that we've been told it's a funding issue; it's a
mental health issue: ``You can't incarcerate your way or law
enforcement your way out of crime.'' Stats tell you, Charlotte,
that you're safe, so sit down and be quiet.
It's outrageous. It's outrageous. Their statistician said
disregard 1.5 million dead Americans. The law enforcement data
that he utilized is inherently flawed. Sit down and be quiet
because you're safe.
Again, I find it outrageous. We do not have a spending
problem; we have an ideological problem. When we start to look
at behavior as some sort of collective trend or some sort of
disparate impact if we actually police, rather than what one
person does--does he or she deserve to be charged and
prosecuted--we're going to be way off course. That's it.
Justice is blind. If you commit a crime, you deserve to be
prosecuted. I hate to say this, but I've been very convicted up
here; if any of us on this row right here had something stolen
from us, if we were slapped, punched, shoved to the ground, do
you think that we would be crying at mental health? I find it
laughable. I find it laughable.
I'm astounded that we look at the brutal murder of Iryna--
how anybody could conclude this is a mental health crisis is
astounding.
I am short on crime--I mean on time. Ms. King, let me just
ask you, one tool that I think is underutilized is the task
force officer model. Can you briefly summarize how we can
implement that around the country to force multiply for good?
Ms. King. Absolutely. The task force model, which was best
utilized through the Organized Crime Drug Task Force, combines
resources at both the Federal and the State level, law
enforcement, and even prosecutors. The benefit of that is
because, oftentimes, local law enforcement, they know the
drivers of violent crime on the street. They're in the
community every day. They know those repeat offenders.
However, the Federal law enforcement oftentimes does, in
fact, have more resources--whether that be money to throw at
investigations and or manpower.
Mr. Knott. Right.
Ms. King. Combining those tools really does make a bigger
and better impact. They're able to make bigger and better
cases. They're able to focus their attention on specific
problems, such as violence crime.
In my experience as a prosecutor, the most violent people I
was ever able to prosecute were, in fact, the result of a task
force model.
Mr. Knott. Right.
Ms. King. I would echo that--I know the OCEDETF program has
been dismantled. I would echo that bringing back programs such
as that are, in fact, tremendously instrumental in our
communities.
Mr. Knott. Thank you.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields. The gentleman yields.
Last but not least, we have the gentleman from South
Carolina, Mr. Norman.
Mr. Norman. I have sat here for, what, 2\1/2\ hours and
heard Members that serve in Congress quote statistics. Quote
statistics. Crimes statistics down in Charlotte? How does that
help the victims that are up here?
What if, Ms. King, it was your daughter or your
granddaughter?
Or, Congresswoman Ross and Adams, you used your time to
quote how crime is down, what about calling your mayor out,
Mayor Lyles who failed to report the stabbing.
Bring that picture up here.
[Photo shown.]
Mr. Norman. It happened on August 22nd. Where is your voice
for that? Where is your voice for the children who were, as my
colleague mentioned, were let across the border to two on 20
million people by your President, who opened the door--we
finally had a President that stopped it--and you criticize
Trump and quote statistics. Are you kidding me? It's a
disconnect.
What about the 14,000 murders last year? What about that
statistic? What about the--Mr. Federico, what did you say 39
violations and 25 felonies? He is out.
This is an insult. You can fill this entire room with
victims across Charlotte, not from South Carolina, but you can
fill--you can take just a county and fill everybody here. Y'all
using your voice as Members of Congress?
No, it's more than about money. What about cutting the pay
of those judges who cut these criminals loose? What about them?
Yes, y'all put the handcuffs on the police, and you've put the
handcuffs on the police instead of on the victims? It blows my
mind as I sit here and hear this.
Let me give you a visual. Mr. Federico, I see your
daughter. What about this?
Ms. Adams. Mr. Chair.
Mr. Norman. What about this?
Ms. Adams. The family member is here.
Mr. Norman. Mr. Chair, it's my time. It's not her time.
Ms. Adams. Well, have some respect for this family.
Mr. Van Drew. It is the gentleman's time, and it is his
right as a Member of Congress to testify.
Mr. Norman. No, I'm serious. What about this? Where was
her--well, how about that statistic? Did it help her? Tell me,
did it help her? No, it did not. It's a miscarriage of justice.
For the Members to sit up here and use their time, it's
amazing that, in America, what happens here? What happened to
this young lady, what happened to your daughter, and your
granddaughter--
Ms. Alderman. Mary.
Mr. Norman. Mary. That's what happens in Third World
countries. What happened to Charlie Kirk--that's what happens
in Third World countries.
You have Members of your party who are, many of which,
identified with the assassin. All I'm saying is this is not
time for politics. This is not time for any race. It's not time
of any party. It's about time of justice.
Like Mr. Federico said, until we stop--putting people in
prison, no amount of money, no amount of heartbreak and try to
decide is its mental illness, whatever it is, I don't care what
it is; they murdered, right here. It's sick. That's what we've
got to correct. That's what many of up here will stop or at
least stop.
Ms. King, we had a perfect example of a statistic I doubt
you ever would hear of. It's the former law enforcement from my
home State that came up here for a bowling alley. His wife got
assaulted. He jumped up and stopped it like the people failed
to do with this lady. He shot at him--I mean, the criminal. He
had the license tag and all. Guess what the police said? ``We
can't prosecute. We don't have enough evidence.'' He said,
``I've got the license number.'' That statistic never showed
up. The Charlotte Police, for whatever reason, wouldn't report
it.
The bottom line is, until we start getting a lot harder and
start--these do-good policies have to go away. We have got to
start--the crime needs to be prosecuted. Judges that don't do
it, they ought to be replaced. Call for cutting their salary. I
yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields back. I know we have
some unanimous consents on both sides of the aisle.
Mr. Fry, I believe you--
Mr. Fry. Yes, Mr. Chair, I have got two UCs. One is an
article in the National Police Association written by Doug
Wyllie, ``After 21 Years as Defense Attorney, Byron Gipson
Isn't Much of a Prosecutor.''
I also have the--do you want to do them all collectively?
Mr. Van Drew. Yes.
Mr. Fry. I also have the SLED report from Alexander Dickey,
who was the murderer of Logan Federico.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Van Drew. Ms. Ross, I believe you have some, Ranking
Member.
Ms. Ross. Yes, I have a few. Thank you. I ask unanimous
consent to enter into the record a report written by Kylie
Murdock and Jim Kessler, ``21st Century Red State Murder
Crisis,'' published by Third Way February 27--
Unanimous consent, a report written by Chandler Hall, ``The
Highest Rates of Gun Homicides Are in Rural Counties,''
published by the Center for American Progress.
An article written by Nick Wilson, titled, ``Trump
Administration's Budget Will Undermine ATF's Effort to Prevent
Violent Crime.''
An article written by our witness, Mr. Asher, who had to
leave, ``What To Do About Crime's Persistent--``
Then, unanimous consent to enter into the record an article
written by Michael Waldman, ``Trump Defunds Effective Crime-
Prevention--''
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. Ross. Oh. Ms. Adams has one.
Mr. Van Drew. I'm sorry.
Ms. Adams. Mr. Chair, I would like enter into the record
and ask unanimous consent to submit the CMPD report, weekly
crime report of Charlotte-Mecklenburg, from August 24, 2025,
showing a 30-percent decline in homicides compared to the same
period last year.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. Adams. I want to apologize to Iryna's family for that
photo. They don't want that to continue to be used to
politicize. That's exactly what--
Mr. Van Drew. Ms. Adams, your time has expired. Your time
has expired.
Mr. Cline. I've got a unanimous consent request.
Mr. Van Drew. Yes.
Mr. Cline. I move to admit Heritage Podcast, ``The Blue
City Murder Problem.'' The Left's claim that America has a Red
State murder problem is misleading and deflects from
Progressive soft-on-crime policies that have wreaked havoc.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
I want to thank you all for being here. I do want you to
know one thing: Politics is not what it should be sometimes. I
believe that the Majority of folks up here really did hear you
for real. We'll do the very best that we can.
This concludes today's hearing, and we thank our witnesses
for appearing before the Subcommittee today.
Without objection, all Members will have five legislative
days to submit additional written questions for the witnesses
or additional materials for the record, as so desired.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:42 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
All materials submitted for the record by Members of the
Subcommittee on Oversight can be found at: https://
docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=118642.
[all]