 It's interesting. I grew up in the city. I was actually born at Alexandria Hospital and went to city public schools. I remember hearing about just vaguely about the sit-in as a child, but I really didn't know very much about it or its historical impact until probably about six months before we were able to get the order dismissing the charges against the sit-in participants signed by a judge, and I learned about it from the mayor, Justin Wilson, who I believe had been contacted by Gretchen Bulova of historic Alexandria. And from there, of course, I started learning a great deal about it, its impact on the community, and we started thinking of ways that we might be able to do something to try to rectify the wrong that had occurred almost a century before. I would say I think we're very lucky in Alexandria. Obviously, first of all, the town is very old and there is a history here. I think we've been better than most in being willing to look at and address and learn about the difficult parts of our history. Obviously, there's always room for improvement in that regard. And historic Alexandria and all the people that both work there and volunteer there have been really important for that journey of self-introspection, right? So it all originated there, and we've got a number of things in the city that we do to try to remember our very difficult past. We've got Freedom House Museum. We've done a number of lynching memorials, one of which I was recently privileged enough to participate in. This is an outgrowth of that, and it's a real testament, I think, to the people in the city who were willing to kind of get into these very difficult chapters of our past, not shy away from the difficult conversations that go along with it, and really kind of delve into it so that we understand what happened and why it happened. So I remember when the mayor called me and asked me about it. I mean, my first impulse, his ask was, do you think we could find a way to get discharged dismissed? From a justice standpoint, obviously I was immediately committed to it. From a lawyer's perspective and a procedural perspective, when I originally received the call, I thought it was probably a long shot that we would be able to do it. And luckily in the event, it turned out that I was wrong with my initial concerns about that. Well, the first thing was to try to determine what had happened with the case. Unfortunately, if these gentlemen had been convicted of a crime 100 years ago, or almost 100 years ago, it would have been far more difficult to kind of get an order entered that might rectify the situation a little bit. So we had some understanding that the case had never been adjudicated in court. We looked into it. Obviously Gretchen Boulevard and her staff were really important to that process. And what we were able to determine was that the sit-in participants were actually arrested. They were charged with a crime of disorderly conduct. But apparently probably because the prosecutor at the time realized, hopefully the unjustness of it, but was kind of probably stuck in politics of the 1930s, basically he had done nothing. He had not sought a conviction. He had never tried the case, nor had he ever dismissed it. In other words, these men were charged, had a criminal arrest on their official records, and just never had any disposition of the matter, just kind of hung over them the rest of their lives, and indeed even posthumously. So once we determined that, the next step was me reaching out to the Chief Judge of our circuit court, Judge Kimler, to bring up an unusual situation. Obviously this is not something that we would frequently see in our courthouse, and discuss with her whether or not, if I brought a motion to dismiss, as she felt like she would be in a position to sign the order, because that's how courts operate. And so she asked for some time to look into it and think about it, and then a short time later she called me back and told me that if the order was appropriately written, she felt that she had the authority to enter an order dismissing the charges against the sit-in participants. The way it works, I mean it's just like any criminal case. The prosecutor maintains the ultimate discretion in whether to go forward with the case or to dismiss it. Obviously as I pointed out, that decision was never made 80 years ago in the 1930s. So the case was in some way shape or form still extant and still kind of pending here in 2018. So the way any case is dismissed would be normally upon a motion from the prosecutor's office. Our office drafted the motion. I actually wrote it myself, but I don't have the authority to officially dismiss the case. That has to come from court. The court actually dismisses the case by looking at my order, signing the order, and once the judge's signature is on it, it goes into effect. In the matter of the Commonwealth of Virginia versus William Evans, Otto L. Tucker, Edward Gattis, Morris Murray, and Clarence Strange came now the attorney for the Commonwealth and prayed the court to dismiss the charges of disorderly conduct against the defendants named above. And it appearing that the defendants were charged with disorderly conduct in August 1939 at the Alexandria Library Facility on Queen Street. And it appearing that the defendants were lawfully exercising their constitutional rights to free assembly, speech, and to petition the government to alter the established policy of sanctioned segregation at the time of their arrest. And it appearing that the conduct in which the defendants were engaged at the time of their arrest, to wit, sitting peacefully in a library reading books, was not in any fashion disorderly or likely to cause acts of violence. And it appearing that the defendants were in fact not breaking any law and no criminal charge was appropriate at the time of their arrest. And it appearing that the judge assigned to the case elected to avoid issuing a ruling and that the result was that the criminal charges were never adjudicated and the defendants never declared guilty or innocent of any offense. And it appearing that therefore the disorderly conduct charges remain technically extant today, 80 years after they were instituted. And it appearing that in the time period since those charges were instituted the Supreme Court and the Virginia Courts have held that the government endorsed segregation policy of separate but equal is unconstitutional that it diminishes the dignity of American citizens and fails to ensure the lofty ideals contained in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal and should enjoy the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is hereby ordered that the disorderly conduct charges against the five defendants named above should be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice this 18th day of October 2019. Enter this 18th day of October 2019 by Lisa B. Kimler Judge, petitioned for by Brian Elporter, attorney for the Commonwealth. I think the most salient point for me from this entire experience, from an internal journey if you will, is you understand, it helps me understand the inherent authority of the law and the authority that is inherent in my office. And what I mean by that is I, when this occurred, I used this entire incident as a learning experience for the very young attorneys that worked for me as assistant Commonwealth attorneys, assistant prosecutors. And what I reminded them was 1939 was not that long ago. It was outside of my parents' lifetime, but well within my grandparents' lifetime. And in that not that long ago time, six, five, six general individuals who went to a library to read and simply were sitting there had the full authority of the law thrown against them for doing nothing more than sitting in a library quietly reading books to kind of silently express their displeasure with the unjust laws of the time. And so the point that I take from that is that it's really important for all of us to remember that the law is an incohate intangible thing. It's enforced by people. And people are subject to prejudice and they're subject to internal dissension and they're subject to the whims of just being a human being. And so there's a real lesson for us there to understand that this is an ancient history. It didn't happen far away. It happened here in our city. Police officers like the ones we work with went to the library, arrested people for sitting there reading books, and a prosecutor who inherited my or who was in my position and there's only been I think six prosecutors in Alexandria since that person was in charge of this case back in the 30s had a decision to make and he made pretty much no decision. And I can understand it must have been a difficult position for him I guess at the time, but that really is unfortunate because by making no decision he made a decision really in effect to allow these charges to remain extant for almost 100 years. So I use that as a learning experience for the people in my office to understand how the law can easily be used for negative ends and how people who are tasked with enforcing the law have to do it in a non capricious and a thoughtful way and they really need to understand the impact of the decisions they're making. So that really stood out to me and I think it stood out to the people in my office when I was able to sit down with them and give a credible, tangible, close to home example of how the law can be used for really terrible ends. So the first thing I would say is a step like this situation where we were able to enter an order 80 years later. I mean obviously I think that's a very positive step and I attended the event at which the order itself was acknowledged and the family members of the charged sit-in participants were there and it did matter to them in a way that was actually very reassuring to me. The fact that we would take the time 80 years later to try our best to rectify the wrong matter to the family members but I would start off by noting that an order 80 years later does not absolve the city or the prosecutor or the police at the time of the wrong that was committed against these men and 80 years after it occurred there's no way for me or for the mayor or for anyone to really make things right. On the other hand acknowledging the wrong, putting words to paper and having a judge officially clear these men so that they don't have the posthumous stigma of having a criminal charge against them is important. We have to address the past, we have to look at the past with open eyes, we have to be willing to admit that our forefathers failed as human beings in many circumstances and so that's a first step toward making a better Alexandria but it's not the only step, right? I mean we have to continuously kind of reassess where we're going. It's entirely possible in my current position that I can make a decision that 80 years from now people might think was backward or unfeeling or unthoughtful and so people in positions like mine, elected officials, city department heads have to be very, very willing to look at all of the decisions that we make on a day-to-day basis and we have to be willing to be very introspective about that to see the other side of arguments and in the end do our best to do what's right so that's a very kind of amorphous thing but the other thing I would say is particularly in the criminal system where I've been my entire life basically I think it's really important for people in positions like mine to acknowledge that the system has been used for racially biased reasons in the past not just subliminal or unintentional but in this case obviously intentional and I think when we start acknowledging that and not pretending that it didn't happen we can make an effective and a positive difference going forward and so being cognizant of the wrongs that have been perpetrated upon people of color over the years by the criminal system is important people like me enacting policies to try our best to address some of the inequities in the system while still obviously having to do our job I think that's important and the final point I would say and I've already alluded to it is really for somebody like me to sit down now that I'm the old guy in the office and talk to the younger prosecutors who are the ones that are actually on a day-to-day basis trying to get just results in court and explain to them the incredible authority they possess and the concomitant need to possess it and utilize it and wield it with thoughtfulness and with a sense of equality for all people is really important the only thing I would say is this was a very important personal event for me I was definitely moved by the event that was held at the Beatley Library to acknowledge and commemorate the sit-in and the order there were a lot of people there it's interesting because if you'd asked me beforehand you know I would have thought well this is a historical anachronism you know maybe the family members might be interested in it but you know I would have thought a handful of people would have been present and I remember I had another event that night and I wasn't really running late but I didn't get there early either and when I walked into the room and saw that it was just packed with people in the room only, they really had to find a chair so that I could sit up at the front place where the officials were sitting I was just really impressed it affected me in a personal way that I remember now as I'm talking to you and thinking back about it and I guess just to simplify things a little bit stuff like this matters the fact that historic Alexandria came up with this idea the fact that we're willing to assess these things and open our eyes to the injustice that's occurred in the past in our city that matters and I'm very proud of playing a very small part in this I mean all I really did was draft a piece of paper and make a phone call to a judge but that piece of paper and that signature of the judge mattered to the family members of the men who were so wrongly accused of a crime many years ago and so I considered a privilege to serve my hometown and to have participated in this