Gennine Hagar Complete Oral History

Oral History Of
Gennine Hagar
Interviews Conducted by Kurt Hamrock
Published 2026
________
The Stephen J. Pollak Oral History Project
Of the Historical Society of the District of
Columbia Circuit
________
The mission of the Society, founded in 1990, is to record, preserve, and publicize the life
and history of the courts of the District of Columbia Circuit.
The Society is a tax-exempt organization that operates independently from the courts.
A Note from the Historical Society
The mission of the Stephen J. Pollak Oral History Project of the Historical Society
of the District of Columbia Circuit (the “Project”) is to preserve the recollections of the
judges of the courts of the District of Columbia Circuit, as well as those of the lawyers,
court staff, and others who played important roles in the history of those courts. The
Project began in 1991. In 2025, the Historical Society named the Project in honor of
Stephen J. Pollak, who was instrumental in the development and success of both the
Project and the Historical Society, from its beginning. Mr. Pollak served the Society by,
among other things, overseeing the Project, serving for almost three decades on the
Society Board, including as Board President from 2003 to 2019 and as Board Chair from
2019 to 2022. Mr. Pollak retired from the Board in September 2022. He passed away in
February 2024.
Oral history interviews are conducted by volunteer attorneys and others who are
trained by the Society. Before donating the oral history to the Society, the subject of the
history and the interviewer have had the opportunity to review and edit the transcripts.
Indexed transcripts of the oral histories and related documents are available in the
Judges’ Library in the E. Barrett Prettyman United States Courthouse, 333 Constitution
Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C., the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress, and
the library of the Historical Society of the District of Columbia. With the permission of
the person interviewed, the transcripts of oral histories are also available at the Society’s
website, www.dcchs.org. Audio recordings of most interviews are maintained by and in
the custody of the Society.
The contents of and all literary and related rights pertaining to all oral histories
that are part of the Project are governed by and subject to the Oral History Agreements
included herewith. No commercial use of any portion of the oral history may be made
without the written permission of the Society.
© 2026 Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit
All rights reserved.
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. i
Oral History Agreements
Gennine Hagar. …………………………………………………………………………………………… iii
Kurt Hamrock, Esquire. ………………………………………………………………………………….v
Oral History Transcripts of Interviews
March 10, 2014 ……………………………………………………………………………………………..1
August 14, 2014 …………………………………………………………………………………………..41
June 20, 2016 ………………………………………………………………………………………………74
February 9, 2017 ………………………………………………………………………………………….97
Index …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. A-1
Biographical Sketches
Gennine Hagar ………………………………………………………………………………………..B-1
Kurt Hamrock, Esquire …………………………………………………………………………….C-1
ii
INTERVIEWEE ORAL HISTORY AGREEMENT
Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit
Oral History Agreement of Gennine Hagar
1. In consideration of the recording and preservation of my oral history memoir by
the Historical Society ofthe District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, D.C., and its employees
and agents (hereinafter, “the Society”),I, Gennine Hagar, do hereby grant and convey to the
Society and its successors and assigns all of my rights, title, and interest in the voice recordings
l (digitalrecordings, cassette tapeal and transcripts of my interviews as described in Schedule A
hereto, including literary rights and copyrights. All copies of the voice recordings (digital
recordings, cassette tapes) and transcripts are subject to the same restrictions herein provided.
2. I understand that the Society may duplicate, edit, or publish in any form or
format, including publication on the Internet, and permit the use of said voice recordings (digital
2recordings, cassette tapes) and transcripts in any manner that the Society considers appropriate,
and I waive any claims I may have or acquire to any royalties from such use.
3. I reserve for myself and to the executor of my estate only the non-exclusive right
to use the voice recordings (digital recordings, cassette tapes) and transcripts and their content as
a resource for any book, pamphlet, article or other writing of which I or my executor may be the
author or co-author.
e asa
Gennine Hagar Dated: November 24 2019
Detemben
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this
2oh day of November, 2019. Decamber
Notary Public
My Commission expires: 5/04/0021 GUT
24 gar Aerl 2019, by James E. Rocap, III, President of the
Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit.
James E. Rocap, III
Schedule A
Voice recordings (digital recordings, cassette tapes) and transcripts resulting from four
interviews with the Gennine Hagar, conducted on the following dates:
Description of Media
Interview No. and Date Containing Voice Recordings Pages of Transcript
1. March 10, 2014 All on one CD 1-40
2. August 14, 2014 41-73
3. June 20, 2016 74-90
4. February 9, 2017 91-104
The transcripts of the interviews are contained on one CD.
iv
The Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit
Oral History Agreement of Kust Gennine Hamrod Hagar
1. Having agreed to conduct an oral history interview with Gennine Hagar for the
Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, D.C., and its employees and agents (hereinafter “the Society”), I, Kurt Hamrock, do hereby grant and convey to the Society
and its successors and assigns all of my rights, title, and interest in the voice recordings (digital recordings, cassette tapes) and transcripts of the interviews as described in Schedule A hereto, including literary rights and copyrights.
2. I understand that the Society may duplicate, edit, or publish in any form or for- mat, including publication on the Internet, and permit the use of said voice recordings (digital recordings, cassette tapes) and transcripts in any manner that the Society considers appropriate,
and I waive any claims I may have or acquire to any royalties from such use.
3. I agree that I will make no use of the oral history or the information contained
therein until it is concluded and edited, or until I receive permission from the Society.
Kurt J. Hamrock Dated: November 7, 2019
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this
th day of azember2019.
sedndyNotary Aive Public Sharpe
My Commission expires: Soly 31, 2023
WENDY ANNE SHARPE NOTARY PUBLIC
REGISTRATION7659072 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIА
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 31,2023
Bhe
ACCEPTED this24 day of
the Historical Society of the District A of Columbia Circuit. 2 .by eme . tsar Ptsdest of
James E. Rocap, III
Schedule A
Voice recordings (digital recordings, cassette tapes) and transcripts resulting from four
interviews with the Gennine Hagar, conducted on the following dates:
Description of Media
Interview No. and Date Containing Voice Recordings Pages of Transcript
1. March 10, 2014 All on one CD 1-40
2. August 14, 2014 41-73
3. June 20, 2016 74-90
4. February 9, 2017 91-104
The transcripts of the interviews are contained on one CD.
iv
1
Oral History Of Gennine Hagar
Chief U.S. Probation Officer
United States District Court For the District Of Columbia
First Interview
March 10, 2014
This interview is being conducted on behalf of the Oral History Project of the Historical Society
of the District of Columbia Circuit. The interviewee is Gennine Hagar. The interviewer is Kurt
J. Hamrock. The interview is taking place in the offices of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP,
1900 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. on March 10, 2014, beginning at 4:07 p.m.
MR. HAMROCK: Ms. Hagar, thank you very much for agreeing to participate in this oral
history project. The Historical Society of the D.C. Circuit has been
working very hard on these oral histories, and we think they are a valuable
addition to the historical archives of the Circuit. We appreciate you
spending the time with us today. Today we would like to talk about just
general background information about you, your family, growing up the
D.C. area, your basic primary and secondary education, college, and your
entrance into the workforce. So with that, I would love to hear from you
whatever you might care to share with us about your family.
MS. HAGAR: I was born in Salisbury, MD and I grew up in Pocomoke City, MD, which
is a small town on the Delmarva Peninsula. I did not move to the D.C.
area until the early 80s when I began working here. I am from a rural area
and coming to D.C. was an entirely different experience. I had a good
childhood. My mother Geraldine Milbourne, was still in high school and
my father Alphonso Selby was finishing high school and getting ready to
go to college when I was born. I was raised in the house with my
grandparents, Donald and Elsie Milbourne, because my mother was a
teenager and still living at home. She was the oldest of my grandparents’
2
four children. My mother later married and moved out. However, I
continued to live with my grandparents. I went to live with my mother
and stepfather Randall Poole for a short period of time, but eventually I
moved back to my grandparents’ home. My mother later divorced and
returned to my grandparents’ home with my younger sister Tammy and
brother Randall. Shortly thereafter, me, my mother, and my younger sister
and brother moved to our own home. My mother worked at night for
Campbell’s Soup Company and I was responsible for my younger
siblings.
My father also married, and I have several half brothers and sisters. We
were raised to regard each other as brothers and sisters and do not use the
terms half or step brother or sister. My father died in 1996. My
stepmother is also deceased. In total, I have four brothers and three
sisters. I am the oldest of all the children as well as being the oldest
grandchild. Being the oldest I’m kind of bossy . . . so they say, but
whatever (laughing). I was fortunate to be surrounded by a good family.
The house that I grew up in and our community were lively.
My grandparents’ home was in the rural area of town in a community
called Saint James. During the summers, I remember waiting for the
bookmobile to come. I read all the time, and I still do. Reading is my
favorite pastime. I never felt that we were poor, because I never wanted
for anything. I lived in a close-knit community and some of my neighbors
are still my best friends. I had a strong foundation in the United Methodist
3
Church. I have believed in God all my life and I still believe that
everything that I am and all I have comes from God. It troubles me when
I hear about people who experienced bad childhoods. I have heard so
many stories throughout my career, but that was not my experience.
Pocomoke City was a nice place to grow up. I felt safe and I don’t recall
any major disturbances in the town. I did very well in school and was
always an A student. Because I grew up around my aunts and uncle, who
were teenagers, I watched them studying and I began to read at an early
age. I graduated as the Salutatorian of my high school class, and received
a Maryland Merit Scholar award, a statewide award given to those
graduating in the top 5% of their class. I was involved in many activities.
I played sports and was MVP in volleyball. I was also a cheerleader,
pompom band member. I did a lot at school, and learning came easy to
me.
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s talk some about just life at your grandparents’ home. How long
were you there?
MS. HAGAR: I would say until I was about 13 years old and then I moved away with my
mother in our own house. When I was young, my only uncle, Harry, who
is now deceased, was in the Vietnam War. I wrote letters to him while he
was in Vietnam and I remember when he came home he told me that he
would read my letters to the guys in his troop. I was about eight or nine
years old around that time. He told me that when the mail would come
they would say, “What is Gennine doing?” He said the guys would laugh
4
about my description of what was going on back home and that anything
that made them laugh was a good thing. My grandparents watched news
anchorman Walter Cronkite to learn about what was happening in the war.
As a child, seeing the war scenes on TV and knowing that someone you
loved was there was scary.
I also remember when Martin Luther King was killed. It was kind of odd
because I recall everyone being in the living room around the piano and
crying over this man who died. I did not understand what was doing on. I
remember asking “Who is Dr. King?” and wondering if he was someone
from our church. They said no. I do remember some things regarding
segregation, like going to the moving theater in our hometown and having
to sit in the balcony. The Eastern Shore of Maryland had a southern
mentality, but I don’t recall any racial turmoil in my community as a
youth.
By the time I began school, integration had started. However, my aunts
and uncles went to a segregated high school, and my mother did too. They
had to take a bus that would come through our neighborhood very early.
They would have to travel almost an hour to get to their segregated school,
even though there was another school probably ten minutes away from the
house.
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s talk for a few minutes about your relatives. Would you tell us about
your grandparents, parents, and aunts and uncles?
5
MS. HAGAR: My grandmother is deceased now, but she was my primary caregiver. My
grandfather is still alive and he actually came to my swearing in as Chief,
and that was wonderful. It is really good that he is still here. My
grandparents divorced when I was 10 or so. My grandmother worked in a
local chicken factory and my grandfather, at one point, had a store. He did
different things. Both of my aunts finished high school, and one of them
graduated from college and became a teacher. After returning from
Vietnam, Uncle Harry was a bricklayer most of his life. I was surrounded
by many great aunts and uncles as well. Most of them were laborers.
They were intelligent, kind, hardworking, church going people who
always seemed to keep up with the news. I guess that was because of the
times, the 60s and 70s. Our neighbors were the same.
My father was the first one from his family to go to college. He graduated
from Maryland State College in 1966. It is now called the University of
Maryland Eastern Shore. At that time, going to and graduating from
college was quite an accomplishment.
When my son Gregory was very young, I let him stay with my mother in
Pocomoke City during the summers. I wanted him to have the experience
of being a part of a close-knit neighborhood and church in a rural area. I
believe that experience made him a better person and remains one of the
best things that I have ever done for my son. We spent a lot of time on the
water, crabbing, fishing, and just bonding. Sitting and waiting for a crab
to bite a piece of meat is just amazing! Our times sitting at the water’s
6
edge are among my fondest memories. Of course we had hardships, but I
was rarely aware of them. I was encouraged to read and do well in school,
and I did. I had always had a good memory. When I graduated from high
school, in addition to being the salutatorian, I received the Daughters of
the American Revolution Award, for outstanding citizenship. The
teachers and the principal picked one student to get the award. I was most
surprised about receiving that award more than any other.
MR. HAMROCK: Tell me about the house where you grew up?
MS. HAGAR: Our family home is still standing. My grandfather bought it from a
schoolteacher who taught in a one-room building in the early 1900s. The
house is very old now. Whenever I doodle something, it’s always a
picture of that house. It is an A-frame, three bedrooms, two-level colonial
that sits on about 3 acres of land. Behind the house there is a crop field
and trees. We had a huge front yard. I love that house. I remember
getting dressed there on my wedding day. My grandfather rents it now,
but whenever I go to the Eastern Shore, I make my husband drive past the
house. There were a lot of girls in our community and we are still friends.
We lived in a neighborhood called St. James, and the church that I
attended was St. James United Methodist Church, which is over 100 years
old. It is still there and people still go there. There is a lot of history
there. There are graves of people who were born during slavery. My
father’s grandmother is buried there, my grandmother, my father,
everybody. I was married at that church. The church was the center of
7
our lives in the community. In a rural area there was not much else to do.
I guess there could have been other things, but church is what we did.
MR. HAMROCK: You mentioned houses on either side of you. Was it a densely populated
area?
MS. HAGAR: No. You were just close enough to yell to your neighbor. There were
probably 20 or so families living along a rural road and each house was
down a long lane. You had to walk down the lane to catch the bus, and
the bus would stop in one place and pick all of us up. My other family
members were not far. Most of them just a few miles away further down
the same rural road. All of my family were from the Eastern Shore. As a
youth, I was told that the slaves who were in our area came from Africa,
were sold in Annapolis, and worked on the plantations on the Eastern
Shore. I do not have family from North Carolina or other Southern states
because our family pretty much went from Annapolis to the plantations on
the shore. There is a plantation four or five miles from where I was raised,
and the plantation is still there. It is called the Beverly Plantation. I do
not know if that is where my ancestors were slaves, but likely so.
MR. HAMROCK: You started to talk already about how you spent your summers while you
were there at Pocomoke. Would you like to tell me some more about that?
MS. HAGAR: The summers were good. We played, read, and went to vacation bible
school. When I grew older, one of my aunts had moved to Philadelphia,
and I spent a couple of summers with her. Going to “the city” was quite a
change. Pocomoke City compared to Philadelphia was like night and day,
8
but a good experience. My uncle lived in Connecticut for a short time. I
spent a couple of summers in Bridgeport, Connecticut. As a teen, during
the summers, I always worked. Living on a peninsula, we went to the
ocean often. There were many trips to Assateague Island, the beach, and
Ocean City. There were no family vacations other than to see other family
members. One summer job that I had for several summers was at the
Peninsula General Hospital in their personnel department. I also worked
in the hospital library that the doctors used. I was able to read a lot of
books and learn about bizarre medical conditions. It was scary because
the library for the doctors was in the basement right beside the hospital
morgue. When I had to come out of the library to go to lunch, there were
always funeral people outside my door, waiting on a body.
I also worked in the chicken factories a couple of summers. Chicken
factory work is hard work, very hard work. You stand for hours, or you
may be cutting something, or dipping your hands into ice. A lot of the
African American people who lived on the Eastern Shore worked at
Perdue and Holly Farms chicken factories. One thing I will tell you, and
this is not a plug for Perdue, the factories were clean, well run, if
something did go bad they would immediately remove it.
My mother worked at Campbell’s Soup factory for many years, until they
closed the factory in our town. She then became a nurse’s aide.
Sometime after he graduated from college, my father worked for and
retired from the Farmers Home Administration.
9
MR. HAMROCK: What do you remember most about your grandparents growing up? I
mean, if you had to describe them in just a few words, how would you?
MS. HAGAR: Interesting, hardworking, and loving. I called them mom-mom and poppop. They were young grandparents, who were still in their 30s when I
was born. I was their first grandchild, and their daughter was still living at
home. They paid a lot of attention to me. They loved me and I felt it. My
mother was a teenager, and was a good mother, but she was still a
teenager. My grandfather still stays interested in what I do. When we talk
he asks about my job, my family, and me. My grandmother guided me on
the right path. We went to church regularly and I wanted to go! After
everyone had moved out and my grandmother and grandfather divorced,
my mother had gotten married and her, my aunts, and uncle had all left, it
was just me and my grandmother in the house for a while. I remember
doing good things with her, and most of it was church, but I liked it.
MR. HAMROCK: Talk to me about the church experience. I mean, different churches have
different atmospheres, different activities and so forth. What do you
remember about your church time?
MS. HAGAR: St James United Methodist Church. Wow! All my friends and family
were there, and that is where I first learned about God. We had good,
honest, God-loving preachers. My favorite one was Reverend Cannon.
He died recently. He was in his 90s. They all had a great sense of humor.
They let children be children. We were disciplined, but they made it a
place where you felt safe. Most of the ministers who came through our
10
church lived an upright life and you could see that they were serious about
God. I think having that role model at an early age was a great influence.
I saw Reverend Cannon occasionally over the years and he remained a
humorous, devout, man of God. He was a great example of what a
Christian should be.
MR. HAMROCK: Was it a large congregation?
MS. HAGAR: Oh indeed not. Probably 100 people at the most, which included most of
the people from the St. James community. My church was a part of the
United Methodist Church circuit. There were three United Methodist
African American churches in Pocomoke City, and for many years only
one preacher served all three churches.
MR. HAMROCK: I should have asked you this earlier. When you were growing up in
Pocomoke City, how large was it? What was the population?
MS. HAGAR: Probably about 6,000. There were about 120 people in my high school
class. The high school had four or five hundred students. Most of us
began kindergarten together, and went all the way through high school. I
know some of those people better than their spouses probably knew them.
Many of us remain friends. One of the greatest times I had was when I
went to a reunion probably five or so years ago. It was just good for my
soul to be with the friends of my youth.
MR. HAMROCK: Let us shift our conversation then and talk about your schooling. Tell me
about your elementary school all the way up through high school. What
sort of memories do you have of that?
11
MS. HAGAR: I had very good teachers. One of my teachers, Ms. Bishop, would sit in a
rocker and read to us. Back then teachers actually smoked in the
classroom. I remember her smoking and reading Moby Dick to us. She
might have read us other books, but I remember her reading that book.
My history teacher in high school was Mrs. Lewis, who I believe I had as
a history teacher from the ninth grade through twelfth grade. I always tell
everybody that Mrs. Lewis was harder than any college professor I ever
had. I think she won “Maryland Teacher of the Year” many years ago.
She is deceased now, but she was a good teacher who knew what you
were supposed to know, and she would say “I taught you all this last year,
you all should know this.” So you had that to contend with. My English
teacher in high school taught me how to write well. They were good
caring teachers who were invested in teaching children. Maybe that is just
the way small towns are, but they were the best teachers by far. When I
had to write my salutatorian address a couple of my teachers looked at it.
One teacher said “Oh no you’re not going to say that!” You know, when
you are a teenager, you really don’t know what to say, and I remember
their help with my speech.
I could have gone to almost any college in America because my grades
were good, but I was afraid to go too far. I received many scholarships
and did not have to pay for my undergraduate education. My teachers
tried to encourage me to go somewhere far away, but I was adamant that
Baltimore was about as far as I was willing to go. I told them that I would
12
go somewhere close for a year and then I would transfer to someplace
else, but I never did because I liked it at Towson University. There are
some places in America where you still can have a good childhood, and
good teachers and family. I was fortunate. I would say the same about
my profession. I was in the right place at the right time, with the right
people. My life just happened, bit by bit, according to God’s plan for me.
MR. HAMROCK: Did you have an elementary and a high school, or was there a middle
school as well?
MS. HAGAR: Yes, elementary, middle, and high school.
MR. HAMROCK: Okay, what were the grades for each?
MS. HAGAR: High school started at ninth through twelfth, and middle school was sixth
through eighth, and elementary was from kindergarten through fifth grade.
MR. HAMROCK: You talked about this a little earlier, but tell me about the extracurricular
activities that you participated in?
MS. HAGAR: I was a volleyball player, and I liked sports. My senior year I was MVP. I
was in the marching band as a pompom girl my whole time in high school.
I was also a basketball cheerleader the entire time in high school, and I
was on the yearbook staff. I stayed involved in a lot of things.
MR. HAMROCK: Okay, so we have talked about your childhood and teenage years.
Looking back now, what sort of changes did you see in your town in the
area from the time you were quite young, up until you graduated high
school?
13
MS. HAGAR: More people moved from the rural area where I grew up to live within the
town’s “city” limits. Many relocated to larger cities. When I was a little
girl, I used to be fascinated by the migrant workers who came from
Florida. They were not Hispanic like they are today, but primarily they
were African American. The farmers would have special little houses,
almost huts, where the migrant workers would live for the summer. As I
got older, that did not happen as much. Years later, I started seeing more
Hispanics come to do the farm labor. This was quite a change, because at
one point it was truly all African American. Also, more of the younger
people left the area because there were not many places to work in that
area of the Eastern Shore. A lot of them my age and older, would go away
to college, and not come back. If you did not work in a university or
school, there was not too much more to do.
MR. HAMROCK: You mentioned the migrant farm workers—what sort of crops were being
raised there?
MS. HAGAR: Corn, tomatoes, cucumbers, peaches, pears, string beans, potatoes,
everything. Now it looks like mostly corn is grown, but back then there
were all kinds of crops. People picked them and made money doing that.
MR. HAMROCK: You talked about a couple of summers where you would go up and visit
big towns, Philly and Bridgeport. Tell me about those memories.
MS. HAGAR: I stayed with my Aunt Bessie in Philadelphia. It was my first time ever
getting on a trolley. Catching the Greyhound bus by myself to go to
Philadelphia was very frightening. Someone would put me on the bus in
14
Pocomoke and my aunt would be there to pick me up. Unlike Pocomoke,
Philly did not shut down at night. People moved around all through the
night and they sat outside on the steps late into the night. You could not
do that on the Eastern Shore where there is water all around. The bugs
would eat you alive. I got the opportunity to see different lifestyles, and it
was just—oh my goodness, it was just so different. I also went to
Bridgeport where my Uncle Harry lived for a few years. Of course, he
lived in an all-black neighborhood, so it was a lot like Philadelphia to me.
I spent many summers in Philadelphia.
MR. HAMROCK: Were you tempted to go and live there?
MS. HAGAR: Never. At one point, my grandfather was living near Villanova
University, and visiting him there was quite different. He worked for a
white family for many years, and he still goes to see them. I cannot think
of their name—I should know that, but he worked as their butler. I
learned a lot of things from him about etiquette. You know, with African
Americans, when they have worked in other people’s homes—we learn
more about etiquette, what to do, what to say, what to wear, what to pick
up, than many would think. Although I enjoyed visiting the cities, it was
never good enough to make me want to live there. Absolutely not!
MR. HAMROCK: So you mentioned Philly and Bridgeport during your childhood, teenage
years. Were there any other trips to big cities that you remember?
MS. HAGAR: No.
MR. HAMROCK: Did you ever visit Baltimore or Washington?
15
MS. HAGAR: Washington on a school trip, but I do not recall going to Baltimore.
MR. HAMROCK: What are your memories of Washington on your field trip?
MS. HAGAR: The Monument. That is the only place that I remember going to, but I
know that I went to many other places. I had never seen anything that tall.
I would have never dreamed that I would work in the Capital one day.
MR. HAMROCK: Well, let’s move to your college years. Tell me first—I know you
mentioned that you had decided on Towson. But tell me about the process
of deciding that is where you wanted to go?
MS. HAGAR: Well, I had actually wanted to go to Tuskegee, but it was so very far and I
had not been that far away from home. I was afraid. There were no
family members there, and we did not know anyone in Alabama, so that
was out. There were other people who were in my high school who had
gone to Towson, and that helped me to decide to go there. I received
scholarships and did not have to pay for college. So, I went to Towson
and did very well. I really liked it and did not leave until I graduated.
MR. HAMROCK: When you decided to go there, had you decided at that point what to
study?
MS. HAGAR: No, I do not remember when I made that decision. As a young child, I
wanted to be a judge. I started taking sociology courses and liked them. I
also liked criminology. I did an internship at the Parole and Probation
Office in Towson. What they did was so interesting. They were not
police or social workers. They were in the office and out of the office,
attended court, and went to people’s homes. Oh my God! It was the most
16
exciting thing! There was never a dull day. The officers met all types of
people, rich people, homeless people, and I wanted to try this profession.
MR. HAMROCK: Before we talk about your studies, tell me about just the general
experience of starting at college for the first time. Big change in your
surroundings, people, what were your experiences your first year?
MS. HAGAR: My first year, I shared a room with a black girl from New York City and a
white girl from Camp Springs, Maryland. I knew nothing about New
York, or about Prince George’s County, Camp Springs, Maryland. Even
though we were so diverse, we got along well. I have gotten along well
with most people. By the next year, I had made new friends and started
rooming with someone else. My roommate experiences were good. There
was a pretty large African American population at Towson who lived on
campus. Most of them were from Prince George’s County, Maryland.
There were only a few that I knew from the Eastern Shore and none from
my hometown. The only students at Towson from my hometown were
white. It was a nice campus community. I pledged a sorority, which
meant I met even more people. I also became the President of the
Chapter. I met my husband there through one of the fraternities and once I
met him, I knew I was there to stay.
MR. HAMROCK: At what point in college did you pledge the sorority?
MS. HAGAR: Fall 1980.
MR. HAMROCK: Did students typically pledge their sophomore years?
17
MS. HAGAR: Second or third. You had to have at least, I think, 30 credits to pledge
Delta Sigma Theta. You also had to have a certain grade point average.
That was back in the day when you really pledged. You walked a line,
you wore identical clothing, all of that.
MR. HAMROCK: Tell me more about that.
MS. HAGAR: I can’t (laughing). No, but that was a good experience. I call them my
line sisters; the eleven of us who pledged together in 1980. Today, some
of my best friends are my line sisters. We have a close and strong
relationship. We recently met on Martin Luther King’s Day for lunch.
Nine of the eleven attended. This has been a 30-year relationship. We
still talk, keep up with each other, and we are all still alive. I would not
trade our experiences or relationship for the world. What people do not
understand about pledging is that, if it is done correctly, the goals are to
make you closer, and to teach you how to work together in a group and get
things done under difficult situations. It also teaches you how to study and
work without having much sleep. You had to help the big sisters and still
get your work done. I made the Dean’s List the semester I pledged. My
sorority experiences taught me a lot and we formed bonds that have lasted.
There are good things, really good things about pledging, not the hazing or
hitting—I was never hit or anything, but the ones who do those types of
things, do not understand the true purpose of pledging.
MR. HAMROCK: What sort of public activities did the sorority have?
18
MS. HAGAR: The foundation of Delta Sigma Theta is community service, academic
excellence, and sisterhood. In college, every line had to complete certain
tasks and perform community service. We tutored and did charity drives.
On line, we were trained to do service, and taught how to prepare an
action plan, which outlined how you were to carry out whatever you were
planning to do. We worked together as sisters.
Of course there is the social part of sorority life, but Delta is about service.
One of the things we learned through pledging is that we must work to
make the entire community better. The community extends well beyond
Delta or the black community. The community is the world.
MR. HAMROCK How large a component of the campus was “Greek life?” I mean, were
there a lot of sororities and fraternities?
MS. HAGAR: Oh yes. All of the major Greek organizations were on campus.
MR. HAMROCK: Besides the sorority, what other activities did you participate in when you
were at Towson?
MS. HAGAR: Only sorority and school, that was it. Through the sorority I did a lot of
things and I was still in the library almost every night. I ended up
graduating cum laude from college as well.
MR. HAMROCK: During your college years, were you on campus in the dormitories?
MS. HAGAR: The dormitories.
MR. HAMROCK: All four years?
19
MS. HAGAR: Except for my last semester when I moved off campus with a couple of
my sorority sisters. We lived in a community in Baltimore not far from
the campus.
MR. HAMROCK: During the summers would you go back to Pocomoke City?
MS. HAGAR: I did my first summer, and I may have gone back home my second
summer. Later I found jobs at fast food restaurants in the Towson area.
Soo, I stayed most summers.
MR. HAMROCK: Are you good? Do you need to take a break?
MS. HAGAR: No, I’m good.
MR. HAMROCK: Ok. You mentioned the internship at the Parole and Probation Office.
Tell me more about the internship.
MS. HAGAR: If I recall correctly, it was in the courthouse in Towson. It was almost
across the street from the University. It was a convenient and good
internship. I worked with a white male and a female officer. Their
dedication to their profession was something that I have never seen before.
Meaning, I had never experienced a white person being caring and
involved in the lives of African Americans. I never heard them talk
disparagingly. Also, their interest in what I wanted to do was very
encouraging. I decided to apply for a position with the Maryland Parole
and Probation Office and was hired shortly after graduating.
MS. HAMROCK: Let’s talk for a few minutes about general life at college. Not necessarily
college itself, but the Baltimore area. What are your recollections of the
area at that time?
20
MS. HAGAR: We did not venture far from the University. Every now and then we
would catch the bus down to the Inner Harbor. Although Towson is right
outside of Baltimore, going into the city was discouraged. Many students
did go to Baltimore. We went to a club sometimes, but it was not
something that most of the students that I associated with did frequently.
We stayed close to the campus. There was a sense of fear that kept me
from going into the city. There was no public transportation in Pocomoke.
So, getting on a city bus was something I did not do by myself. The only
bus that came through our town was a Greyhound bus. There was always
something going on at the school, so we did not have to leave campus.
We did eventually leave later, sometimes to go to the Morgan campus to
see the sorority sisters or something of that nature. I ventured out into the
city much more after college.
MR. HAMROCK: Was the Towson campus primarily African American at the time?
MS. HAGAR: No. Absolutely not. African Americans were the minority.
MR. HAMROCK: While you were there did you have any experiences that raised issues for
you in terms of race relations while in the college environment?
MS. HAGAR: No. Towson at that time was pretty congenial. I remember a black
fraternity and a white fraternity had a dance or something together, but
that was in the late 1970s and early 1980s, it was not bad at all. I knew
that racial tension probably existed, and there were some places we did not
go. If you wanted to mix racially, you could do so and it was not taboo at
all.
21
MR. HAMROCK: You mentioned that through your sorority you met your future husband.
MS. HAGAR: Correct.
MR. HAMROCK: Tell me.
MS. HAGAR: Well, actually I met him through his fraternity. I was a sweetheart for one
of the lines. He actually started the fraternity of Kappa Alpha Psi on
Towson’s campus. He was from Gary, Indiana. He went to Vincennes
College in Indiana for two years and he pledged there. My husband
Chuck, his real name is Charles Hagar, is eight years older than I am. He
went to the Air Force after Vincennes College. After leaving the Air
Force, he came to Towson to finish his college degree. I had gone to an
event sponsored by his fraternity and I met him there. We started talking
and then later we had a class in the same building. Our classes were side
by side and we talked more, and from there we started to date. I married
him when I was 22 years old, and we have been married 30 years now.
MR. HAMROCK: Had you graduated from college when you married?
MS. HAGAR: Yes. The year after I graduated. I graduated in 1982 and married in 1983.
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s talk about the decision to start working after you graduated. Tell me
about your first job.
MS. HAGAR: I had applied for Maryland Parole and Probation, but had not received
word of a position yet, because you had to take a test and do some other
things. My first job was at the Woodies (Woodward & Lothrop)
department store in DC in security. I lived with my girlfriend’s parents in
Prince George’s County. I caught the bus downtown to Woodward and
22
Lothrop. Woodward and Lothrop was located in a huge building on 9th or
10th & F Streets NW in Washington, DC. They also occupied a building
behind that location. Some of the glass columns in the store were actually
closets where the security officers would watch people on the floor. The
easiest place to steal something was the dressing room because you truly
could not watch people in the dressing room. You could only count the
items that they took in and brought out. Also, there were what appeared to
be air vents, but they were slots where security staff could observe
shoppers. That was really my first law enforcement job. I had to arrest
people who were shoplifting, complete the paperwork, and take it to the
DC Metropolitan Police Department. I worked there for several months.
August of 1983, I was offered the job with Maryland Parole and Probation
and I left my employment at Woodies.
MR. HAMROCK: What were your impressions of DC at that time?
MS. HAGAR: It was busy. Downtown was truly downtown and Woodies was right in
the center of it. There were a lot of stores, a lot of people; a lot was going
on. The downtown area was vibrant back in 1983. The downtown area
died for a long time and now it is full of life again.
MR. HAMROCK: Tell me about the job with Maryland Parole and Probation.
MS. HAGAR: I started there in August of 1983, two months after I got married. I began
working in the College Park office not too far from the University of
Maryland. Maryland Parole and Probation had a wonderful training
program. We went through six weeks of training in Woodstock, Maryland
23
where they taught us everything we needed to know as new officers. Once
the training was over, we went back to the office and began to work.
My husband and I were living in Baltimore, and I was driving from
Baltimore to College Park every day. I was assigned to Landover and
Cheverly, which were not the good places in PG County at that time. I
was hoping that I would be assigned to College Park and Laurel, but I was
not. I did eventually learn how to get around in PG County. That was
really a great start, and it was a great start because we were trained well. I
had good supervisors, one of which was Mr. Leroy Jones. Mr. Jones was
the Director of Maryland Parole and Probation, or Regional Director, at
the time. He told me, “I’m going to give you two pieces of advice that
you should take throughout your work life. Always return all your calls, I
do not care who it is or how high or low the person’s status, and always
take a lunch.” When I got sworn in as Chief, I shared the advice Mr Jones
gave me. I have followed his advice. I take a lunch, and I do not care
who calls me, I return their call. He said he was not able to make it to my
swearing in, but I talked to him. He called to congratulate me and I told
him what I said and he was touched that I even remembered his advice.
It’s amazing the impact that some people have on you that they do not
even realize they had. Returning calls demonstrates that you are
responsive and professional, and taking that break helps you deal with the
stress. Good advice!
24
MR. HAMROCK: You mentioned several times the training program, how good it was. Tell
me about the sorts of things you received training for.
MS. HAGAR: How to interview and supervise individuals, the rules and regulations that
the state of Maryland had regarding parole and probation, how to complete
forms, and safety techniques. We did not carry firearms in the state of
Maryland at that time, but we did have the safety, defensive tactics, and
counseling training. It was a comprehensive program. I felt good about
walking into the job and doing it after going through that training.
Maryland’s training program demonstrates that training officers or the
new employees of any type builds their confidence and protects the
agency. It is not good to throw anybody in and say “figure it out.”
MR. HAMROCK: Parole and probation. Those words have changed a lot over the years.
MS. HAGAR: Right.
MR. HAMROCK: When you started with Maryland Parole and Probation, what did those
words mean?
MS. HAGAR: Parole meant the person had been to prison and was released on
supervision. Probation meant they may not have been sent to jail, but
placed on supervision for a set period of time. Either way, they were your
individuals to supervise. These were individuals you had to care for to
make sure that they did what they were supposed to do. The role of the
officer is to help the individual become a law abiding and productive
citizen, and to ensure that the community is protected. I informed the
individuals on supervision when it appeared that it was time for me to
25
write the Parole Commission regarding their noncompliance. They were
aware that there were consequences when they submitted too many
positive urines, failed to attend drug treatment, or didn’t do what they
were supposed to do. So, you had them removed from the community and
were hopeful that when they came back, they returned ready to live better.
MR. HAMROCK: Tell me about if there was such a thing as an average day at work when
you were at the Maryland Parole and Probation Office?
MS. HAGAR: In Parole and Probation, you may have your day planned, but it rarely
went as you planned, simply because you were dealing with people.
When someone calls with an issue or the court calls, you had to respond
timely and prioritize. On a typical planned day, you may have to go to
court for a hearing, meet with people in the office, or perform work in the
community. We call community visits “field work.” When performing
field work, we visit the offenders’ homes, treatment programs, and jobs.
We verify whatever the person tells us. The state of Maryland required
officers to have face to face contacts with those on supervision and the
minimum number of contacts were based on the offender’s risk level.
Each day was different and you had many things to do. You never knew
what you would be required to respond to during the day. You were in the
community most of the time. This was not a desk job.
MR. HAMROCK: Tell me about the people with whom you dealt. You know, who were
they? What was their background? What were their offenses that led
them into the criminal justice system?
26
MS. HAGAR: When I was in Maryland, most cases were not as severe as the ones that I
supervised at the U.S. Probation Office. The federal offenders had more
severe criminal backgrounds. The state cases involved drunk driving,
theft, check fraud and sex offenses. Those types of things. At the U.S.
Probation Office, there were conspiracy, drug distribution, government
fraud, murder, bank robbery cases. The federal offenders ranged from
politicians to street gang members. The state offenders were primarily
blue collar workers.
MR. HAMROCK: What do you remember about the policies, for want of a better word, or
priorities of the Maryland criminal justice system at the time you were in
the Probation Office there?
MS. HAGAR: That we had to see the individuals on supervision and maintain frequent
contact with them. We had to make sure that we enforced the conditions
that the court ordered, and that they received treatment. We had to make
sure that we did our best to get them to pay monies owed to victims. I
supervised close to 100 offenders. In Maryland, based on the offense and
the characteristics of the offender, you had to adhere to contact standards.
Some offenders had to be seen a certain number of times each month. In
U.S. Probation, the highest caseload I had was probably 45, which was a
big difference. Surprisingly, this smaller caseload required even more
work.
MR. HAMROCK: How large was the Maryland office?
27
MS. HAGAR: There were several offices in Prince George’s County and I was in the
College Park office. This office was later moved to Beltsville. I would
say there were approximately 30 officers in the College Park office.
Maryland Parole and Probation covered the entire state and there were
several offices, or at least probably one office in very county. The larger
counties like Prince George’s and Montgomery County have many offices.
MR. HAMROCK: During your time, how long were you in that office?
MS. HAGAR: 1983 to 1985.
MR. HAMROCK: Do you remember any changes in the Maryland state government system
that caused any particular changes in your office while you were there?
MS HAGAR: No. Not during that time.
MR. HAMROCK: Thinking back on it now, are there any particularly good stories you
remember about your time there that you would like to share?
MS. HAGAR: I remember I had one individual who I was supervising who was
convicted of impersonating a police officer. He kept doing it, despite
being on probation. He had mental problems, but saw his psychologist
regularly. He would simply tell me, “You know what, he was speeding,
so I pulled him over.” Never harmful, but one day he pulled over a Prince
George’s County police officer, and the officer asked my offender what
precinct he was from. Unfortunately, he named that officer’s precinct and
the real officer arrested him. Several years ago, while I was looking at
TV, there was a report that a Prince George’s County police officer was
killed. When they named the slain officer, I told my husband that the
28
person named was on my caseload over 20 years ago and always
impersonated police. I was able to identify him because he had a unique
name. Subsequent news reports did indeed indicate that the person killed
was impersonating a policeman. So, sadly, he never stopped. All these
years later, he was still engaging in the same type of behavior and it
resulted in his death. Even when the media questioned his neighbors, they
reported that they thought he was a police officer, because that’s how he
acted and that’s what he told them. I remember some of the bad cases that
involved incest, rape, and abuse. The things that you know and witness as
a probation officer are astonishing. These situations are so sad. I just
wanted to make the person better, and sometimes you can’t.
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s go off the record for a tape change.
MR. HAMROCK: This is the Oral History of Gennine Hagar, March 10, 2014, recording
number 2, 5:20 p.m., the offices of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, 1900
K Street, NW, Washington D.C.
MR. HAMROCK: Ms. Hagar, I would like to resume our conversation. I had a couple of
follow up questions about your time working as a parole and probation
officer in the state of Maryland’s Parole and Probation Office. You
mentioned briefly sort of your interaction with other law enforcement
entities and agencies in the court, can you tell me a little bit more about
your interaction with those entities?
MS. HAGAR: I had to appear in court routinely for hearings. I responded to the judges’
inquiries and requests and kept the court informed. Early in my career, I
29
became accustomed to going to court, talking to judges, attorneys, and
police officers. It was a great learning experience and I gained first-hand
experience about how the court system worked. It is not as dramatic as
TV portrays, but there have been emotional moments. The people that I
have worked with, most of them care about their profession and the people
they serve. Most officers and judges try to do the right things for the
victims and for the offender. Everyone seemed to want Prince George’s
County to be safer. It was good working with other professions, such as
with the treatment counselors and psychologists. I learned a lot by
listening to people talk about their jobs.
MR. HAMROCK: How would you describe the role of the parole and probation officer with
respect to the, I don’t know if, “client” is not the right word, the . . .
MS. HAGAR: Individual.
MR. HAMROCK: Individual.
MS. HAGAR: Yes. Oftentimes as a probation officer, you know more about the person
than what most other people know about them. You know things that his
mother, wife, and victim do not know. Over time, if you establish rapport
with them, they confide in you. They want help and they often learn that,
as a good officer, you are there to help them and you want them to make it
through supervision and life. You do not want them to go back to jail,
because in addition to the costs to the government and loss to the family,
as an officer that also means more work for you. Officers must write the
court, attend the hearings, and everything else associated with the
30
revocation of supervision. So, you want them to do well for many
reasons.
Some probation officers see themselves more as law enforcement officers.
They do not become involved as much as they can in the lives of the
person. Other officers view themselves as social workers. I believe we
are a mixture of the two professions. Part of our job as probation officers
requires that we have collateral contacts, which means that we talk with
the employer, neighbors, treatment providers, friends, and family. We are
required to make home visits, and on some of the visits we walk
throughout the house, conduct searches, and ask questions. This routine
practice is something that you have to learn to become comfortable doing
as an officer.
After a while, surprisingly, some of my offenders in DC began to look out
for me as well. They would tell me not to come to a certain area at a
certain time of day, or they would wait outside for me to take me up to
their apartment, so that I would not be in the stairwell alone. This was the
era before cellphones, when building entries were often locked. I did not
view my role as the person trying to send them back to jail, quite the
contrary. I would tell the offender that I was the one trying to keep them
out of jail, sober, and working. In probation, the judge really relies on our
recommendations because the court knows that we have worked closely
with these individuals.
31
Oftentimes, a unique relationship develops between the officers and the
person on supervision. Over the years I have seen many people on the
street that I have supervised, and I am not afraid to interact with them.
There have only been a couple that would instill fear. I am glad to see
them, talk to them, and ask about their family. Even when I see them back
on supervision again, I ask, “Why are you back? What are you doing?
Why are you here? When are you going to give this up? Is this going to
be a life sentence on the installment plan?”
So, yes, it is a different type of relationship. It is different from the
defense attorney who is always advocating for the offender, because I am
not on their side when they are wrong. I am going to say, “You know
what, you are wrong, and this has to be reported because I am required to
report it.” We do not have the option to not report violations to the Parole
Commission or court. I still have to do that, and I have the opportunity to
provide the judge with appropriate alternatives. The judges in the District
of Columbia, and the US District Court, work with us as we work with the
individuals on supervision. Even in Maryland, the judges worked with the
probation officers. I find that the court is often willing to work with the
offenders as long as the offender is not a threat to anyone and is sincere
about changing and seeking help.
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s move on and talk about the time you spent in your next employment
at the District of Columbia Department of Corrections. Tell me about the
transition from the Maryland job to the DC job.
32
MS. HAGAR: Someone in my office in Maryland had told me about the position as a
case manager at the DC jail. It was in the District, different from parole
and probation and paid more. So, I applied and I got the job. I worked at
the DC jail from 1985 to 1988 when the crack epidemic was hitting the
city hard. It was pretty much at the onset of the AIDS epidemic as well.
As a case manager, one of my duties was to interview people who were
brought to jail by police the night before. So, each day when I walked in
around 7:00 a.m., there was a room full of people waiting to be
interviewed. We conducted the interviews in offices that had no barriers.
Some of the individuals were still in bad shape from whatever had gone on
the night before.
During the intake interview, I had to get basic background information. I
believed that I got a lot of truthful answers. Most of them were still in
shock from the arrest or crime, and many had not sobered from the night
before. You heard the stories in their rawest form. Jail intake interviews
were an eye opener for me. Listening to the different stories and seeing
the anguish or anger people had about being in jail, or back in jail was
sobering for me.
The DC Jail was overcrowded at that time, and court orders were issued to
control the inmate population. I remember reporting to the jail a couple of
times right before midnight to process inmates for release, so the jail
would be in compliance with the court order. We had to go through the
paperwork to make sure we were not letting anyone go who was not
33
supposed to be released. As a case manager at the jail, the inmates of the
jail would send me a request that they need to talk to their lawyer, or they
needed to be in the school program. I was their case worker inside of the
jail. One of my duties was to provide the DC Parole Board with
compliance reports that helped them determine whether an inmate should
be released on parole. I provided my recommendation regarding release
and informed the Parole Board of where that person planned to live and
work. For a period, I worked as the case manager for the women’s unit.
Just hearing the women tell their stories was something I will treasure. As
a young person of 25 to 26, it seemed as though everyone at the jail was
older than me. They were kind though. I heard some very colorful and
adult stories. Listening to prostitutes from the city streets of DC provided
me with lessons about life and lifestyles that were quite extreme.
Working at the jail opened my eyes and made me realize what a sheltered
and blessed life I had led. I really never believed people’s lives were that
bad. You would see it on TV, but it is nothing like someone telling you
about something horrific that happened to them. These stories opened my
eyes and made me realize what a sheltered life I had led. I remember a
young black man telling me that someone took him to the roof of an
apartment building and raped him every day from the time when he was 8
until age 12. The women talked about the abuse they endured, being left
to die, but living. I heard what the clinicians said was wrong with the
inmate. Overheard the physicians describe what they had found inserted
34
in an inmate’s body. My DC Jail experience escalated my knowledge of
life beyond measure. The days of my rural girl innocence were long gone.
I was forced to grow up.
In addition to the inmates and their situations, the Department of
Corrections was being sued all the time for sexual harassment. I was
fortunate because I had a good supervisor. I was never subjected to the
sexual harassment that I knew was going on at the jail. By the time I got
to US District Court, I saw some of the jail employees I knew in the
hallway waiting to go into court. Unfortunately, some of the predators in
the jail were actual employees. I learned a lot about the dark side of
humans.
MR. HAMROCK: Were you living in DC at the time?
MS. HAGAR: No. My family has lived in Prince George’s County since moving from
Baltimore to Laurel, Maryland in 1984. We moved from Laurel to Upper
Marlboro in 1987, and to Fort Washington, Maryland in 1996. We
continue to live in Fort Washington. I love Washington DC, its people
and neighborhoods. It is my job to protect the citizens here, and I take that
seriously. I consider myself an honorary Washingtonian (laughs).
MR. HAMROCK: Yes. No objection. At the time you were at the DC Department of
Corrections, who was mayor at the time?
MS. HAGAR: Marion Barry probably. It is interesting because as Chief, I did eventually
get to speak to Marion Barry while he was on supervision in my office as
Chief and shortly after he completed supervision. We had a very nice
35
conversation. It’s ironic that at one point in my career, I worked for him
at the DC jail. It’s funny how life goes.
MR. HAMROCK: What were your memories of DC government generally during that time
period?
MS. HAGAR: It was problematic. I worked in a good unit, and had a good supervisor
within the jail administration, but the news about DC politics, the Mayor,
routinely portrayed DC government as corrupt and inept. Certainly, some
of those things were happening, but there were many very good people in
the DC government. The jail did not seem to have a financial problem
because the needs of the inmates were met. Now there was a space
problem for sure. It was the city’s only jail. The local prison was still
operating in Lorton, Virginia. However, the citizens of that area in
Virginia were always working to close that facility. Ultimately, it was
closed.
MR. HAMROCK: Did you have any interactions with the folks at the US Attorney’s office
during this time period?
MS. HAGAR: No, not while I was at the jail.
MR. HAMROCK: In terms of . . . what kind of training did you receive before you started
with the DC Department of Corrections?
MS. HAGAR: We went to Lorton for about a week and received classroom training about
the Department of Corrections policies and procedures. Most of my
training was hands-on training done by case managers at the jail. My job
title was Classification and Parole Officer. The inmates called us C&P
36
officers. The title was later changed to Correctional Treatment Specialist.
A woman who had been there for quite some time, who had worked at
Lorton and at the jail, trained me. When I first started doing intake, she or
another older classification and parole officer observed and coached me. I
watched them and then as I started to do the intake, they would watch and
guide me. When I received requests from the inmates, they would tell me
how to handle them and they trained me on how to write the reports to the
DC Parole Board.
So, people who had been there for many years trained me. They gave me
the training that was not in the books. For example, I was told not to even
give an inmate an ink pen. As innocent as it seems, inmates were
supposed to get items from the approved sources. The rationale was that
once they knew that you were open to giving them something you were
not supposed to give them, they would continue to escalate their requests,
until one day they would ask you to bring in drugs or other contraband.
Seems extreme, but I heeded their warnings. There were wise people who
worked in the jail, who told me what and whom to stay away from. Their
advice was priceless.
MR. HAMROCK: I know recently there was a lot of publicity about some issues
involving . . .
MS. HAGAR: Baltimore.
MR. HAMROCK: Yes. I wondered if you had any thoughts about that situation?
37
MS. HAGAR: The worst thing that you can do as a correctional officer or probation
officer is to do those things that are contrary to what you are hired to do.
You are making the offender’s life worse by helping them to maintain a
criminal lifestyle. That is about the lowest that you can do in my
profession. I mean, having babies by the inmates? No, No!
MR. HAMROCK: You mentioned to us or you mentioned to me when I met you at your
office about some comments, I guess it was your grandmother had when
you were working this job and you were expecting your first child.
MS. HAGAR: Oh no, that was my mother.
MR. HAMROCK: Your mother.
MS. HAGAR: I worked up until the day I had my son. I worked that Friday and I went
into labor Friday night. She was so concerned that I was going to have my
baby at work and that her first grandchild was going to be born in a jail. I
wasn’t concerned about that at all. I guess I should have been. I was 25
and I was healthy, so I kept going to work. After my son Gregory was
born, and I think I have told him, he used to sit on the stairs and look
between the rails and it was only then that I felt I may have worked at the
jail too long when I was carrying him (laughs). Although the inmates
were nice to me, my parents and my husband were concerned that
something would happen to me. The inmates were respectful. The things
that you see on TV, like when a woman walks through a prison and male
inmates are whistling and making inappropriate remarks, did not happen
like that at the jail. They would ask when is the baby coming, or
38
something like that. The female inmates would tell you about their
children, and ask questions like “have you been sick?” Their questions
and concern appeared sincere. Maybe I was too naïve, I don’t know, but I
was not afraid.
MR. HAMROCK: During this time period in 1985 to 1988, I think you said that by that point
you were either in rural or upper Maryland?
MS. HAGAR: Upper Marlboro.
MR. HAMROCK: Upper Maryland. Upper Marlboro.
MS. HAGAR: Yes. Yes.
MR. HAMROCK: Tell me about your home life during that time period.
MS. HAGAR: I married when I was 22. My husband was 30. He was working as a
television cameraman. When we were living in Baltimore he worked for
Channel 11, and later he worked for Comcast. He has worked in Virginia
as well. Now, he works for Voice of America. He worked for American
Chemical Society for about 10 to 15 years. While there, he traveled all
over the country doing stories about science, chemistry, and medicines.
Sometimes the national and local news would have clips about a new
medicine and the American Chemical Society TV team provided the clip.
He has seen the Northern Lights in Alaska and he has been in a submarine,
while I go to Southeast DC as a parole officer to make home visits. We
work in two entirely different worlds, but it provides lively conversation.
I am fortunate to have a good husband and home life. He always says that
he married a smart woman and he never held me back from whatever I
39
wanted to do. As far as being in the community, I am sure he was
concerned, but I would do whatever I could to reassure that I was safe. I
often told him that it was really not that bad—sometimes it was, and
sometimes it wasn’t. The chief that hired me, Eugene Wesley, said if a
situation in a community looks bad, feels bad, go a different day. If you
are going up to a house and you just have this feeling or something, don’t
go that day. Follow your instincts. Establishing the rapport with the
people you supervised, provided you with some degree of safety. The
communities in the 1980s and 1990s were bad in DC. Some of the same
places, for example, off of Wheeler Road that I really did not like to go to
as an officer, were projects that drug dealers and addicts frequented.
Today, many of the projects have been torn down and replaced with single
family homes and townhouses. It makes you wonder about what
happened to the people.
My home life was and still is my haven. I have a good, kind husband, and
had very good in-laws. My in-laws lived in Gary, Indiana, and were a lot
older than my parents. My husband’s parents were actually my
grandparents’ age. They were very kind to me.
MR. HAMROCK: You mentioned earlier that church was very important to you growing up.
Once you moved to Maryland, did you find a church that . . .
MS. HAGAR: Yes I did. When I became pregnant with my son, I started looked for a
church in Prince George’s County. I knew the importance of being raised
in the church and knowing God. I wanted my son to know that there is a
40
parent who is far greater than I will ever be to him. One who sees all and
will protect him. He was little when we joined Full Gospel AME Zion
Church, and he grew up in that church. It later became From the Heart
Church Ministries. We were members of that church for more than 20
years. I was active in the church and a member of the Young Missionary
Society. We joined a new church this year, and I plan to become fully
active. Still, nothing compares to Saint James United Methodist Church.
MR. HAMROCK: Why don’t we break for today. This is the end of recording number 1 of
the Oral History of Gennine Hagar.
41
Oral History Of Gennine Hagar
Chief U.S. Probation Officer
United States District Court For the District Of Columbia
Second Interview
August 14, 2014
This is the second interview of Genine Hagar in connection with the Oral History Project of the
Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit. The interviewee is Gennine Hagar. The
interviewer is Kurt J. Hamrock. The interview is taking place in the offices of McKenna Long &
Aldridge LLP, 1900 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. on August 14, 2014, beginning at 4:25
p.m.
MR. HAMROCK: Ms. Hagar, thank you for taking the time to sit with me again today, and
talk with us a little bit about your experiences with the United States
Probation Office and generally with your experiences with the D.C.
courts. Today we would like to talk about your work at the U.S. Probation
Office, your experiences there, people with whom you work, the changes
you seen over time and the issues that you see facing the Probation Office
and the courts generally, not only in the pass but also the presence.
MS. HAGAR: Yes.
MR. HAMROCK: So with that, in our last interview we talked about your prior work
experience, and I would like to start today with your work at the U.S.
Probation Office beginning with your first job there. If you could, would
you talk to me briefly about your decision to move to the U.S. Probation
Office and your first job there?
MS. HAGAR: I began working at the U.S. Probation Office in April 1988. Working in
the federal system as a probation officer is the epitome of our profession.
I interviewed, got the job, and started as a Line Officer. As a Line Officer,
you supervise a general caseload. Primarily, I supervised individuals who
42
were addicted to drugs. I also wrote presentence investigations. From
1988 until about the end of 1989, I had a general caseload. After that, I
was assigned a caseload that consisted of individuals who were infected
with the AIDS virus, or who were HIV positive. I learned a great deal
about life, alternative lifestyles, stigmatisms, disease, doctors, and
hospices. This experience helped me to become more aware of different
lifestyles. There appeared to be little lifestyle diversity on the Eastern
Shore. I grew as a person. People would ask me, “Why would you work
with those people? Aren’t you afraid?” Working with people who had a
disease that was new to mankind was frightening initially. As I became
educated about the risks and modes of transmission, I lost that sense of
fear. In the late 80s and early 90s, it seemed as though when a person
acquired the virus, they died quickly. People on my caseload did die.
Supervising them helped me to become more sensitive to people who are
sick from any type of illness.
I frequented hospitals, clinics, and social service agencies helping the
individuals on my caseload get assistance and treatment. You do so many
things and wear many hats as a probation officer.
MR. HAMROCK: Ms. Hagar would you tell me a bit about the first year when you were
General Line Officer at the U.S. Probation Office, before you began the
special work with the clients with HIV?
MS. HAGAR: During the first year, I was in training and the Senior Officers
accompanied me to court and in the field. I reviewed reports and met with
43
my supervisor routinely. Although training was the focus, I still had a
caseload, went to court, and made visits in the community. I had a lot of
guidance during the first year.
One of the things I noticed when I assumed my caseload at the U.S.
Probation Office, was that almost everyone that I supervised was older
than me. I was 27 years old. My caseload was approximately 95% male.
As a parole/probation officer in Maryland, approximately 70% of my
caseload were male and most of them had never served much time in
prison. At the U.S. Probation Office, most of the individuals on
supervision had been in prison an average of five years and they had prior
felony convictions. I was now working with individuals who had been in
the legal system for quite some time.
MR. HAMROCK: Are there any other contrasts that you saw between your prior work
experiences in this field and the new group of people you were
supervising?
MS. HAGAR: Their age, the type of offense, number of prior convictions, time served in
prison, employment history, and substance abuse history. The federal
offenders were typically older with a more serious criminal background.
MR. HAMROCK: What kind of drugs?
MS. HAGAR: Crack at that time. Crack or heroin. However, in the state system in the
80s, the offenders I supervised abused alcohol and used marijuana. The
federal offenders typically used the hard drugs.
44
MR. HAMROCK: What do you remember during the time about your supervisors and your
co-workers?
MS. HAGAR: They were great people. My first supervisor was a black woman named
Solona Moore. She is deceased now, but she was one of the first black
officers hired by the U.S. Probation Office in D.C. I remember she was
very kind, but very strict. She said to me that this is a conservative court;
you are to act that way; behave that way; look the role that you play; don’t
dress down and don’t even wear pants. That was in 1988. Solona’s dress
code for me, is a far cry from the dress code for officers today. My
coworkers were kind, helpful, and wanted me to learn the job. I was
trained to represent the Probation Office well, be responsive to the court
and community and be a good steward of the government’s resources. We
didn’t send people to treatment who had already been there or those who
didn’t need it. My first two supervisors had been officers for a very long
time, and they had been in our court for more than fifteen years when I
started. They were well-rounded, considerate, even humorous, but
tough…tough on new officers.
MR. HAMROCK: Did you have occasion to appear in court?
MS. HAGAR: All the time. I first went to court about a month after starting the job. I
remember one of the first judges that I appeared before was Judge
Barrington Parker. I couldn’t find my mentor at the time to go with me,
because as a new officer a senior officer or your supervisor had to
accompany you to court. I had been before the magistrate judge early on,
45
but on my very first time appearing before a federal district judge, there
was no senior officer in my unit to go with me. I did not even know how
to get to Judge Parker’s chambers. I had also heard that he was really hard
on probation officers. He would question you. I was more afraid of the
judge than I was the offenders…funny isn’t it. I did find my way to his
chambers and when I first walked in I said “Your Honor, I have never
been before a federal judge before, so if I do something that is improper
please tell me and I will correct it.” He said “Young lady, I certainly will.”
From that point on he was quite nice to me. So much so, that when the
other officers had a case before Judge Parker, they would ask me to cover
court for them. So, that was my first experience with a federal judge.
Throughout my career, the DC bench has consisted of judges who are
thoughtful and fair. Among the reasons that I stayed in this court for 26
years is because of the bench. They are concerned not just about the
defendants and offenders, but about the court staff as well. Many of them
have told me that sending someone to prison is the most difficult thing
they have to do and they take it very seriously. As probation officers, our
job is to help provide the judge with reasonable and sound
recommendations. We only make recommendations, but as we all know,
the actual decision rests with the judge.
MR. HAMROCK: Do you recall any other experiences in front of other judges during these
early years of your career as a probation officer?
46
MS. HAGAR: Yes. I had a young lady on my caseload and she had a long criminal
record. She was a prostitute, in addition to a whole lot of other things. I
had tried everything with her; inpatient/outpatient drug treatment, and all
types of therapy. I wanted her to make it. We had appeared before the
court several times due to her violations. Each time I would ask the judge
to let us try this program or let me put her here or there. One day when
she came in, I felt I had exhausted everything that I believed our office
had to offer. I recall being apprehensive about telling her about seeking
God, but I have seen people change because of their faith, so I decided to
say it to her anyway. I said “You know what, you need God.” I told her
that I have seen people change once their beliefs changed. I asked her
what did she believe in and she said “Nothing, nobody, nothing.” I said
that maybe faith is something you should consider. She didn’t reply.
Months later we were back in court for another violation. At the hearing,
she asks the judge if she can speak and the judge agrees. I have no clue
what she plans to say. She says to the judge, “I think it was very
inappropriate for Ms. Hagar to recommend some type of religion to me. I
don’t think that is what she is supposed to do as an employee of the
government. I am not going to do it and I was offended.” Needless to say,
I was stunned and feared the judge’s reaction. This was probably my
second year as an officer. I thought “Oh man, I am going to get in trouble
when my chief hears this.” I was afraid, but believed I had did the right
thing. The judge looked at her for what seemed like a long while to me
47
and then he looked at me. The judge said, “Maybe Ms. Hagar was right.
You know we have been going through this time and time again, maybe
God is what you need.” I was so stunned. She sat down and he just looked
at me and smiled and that was it. The judge sent her back to jail that day.
Years later, I saw her hitchhiking on the beltway.
MR. HAMROCK: Oh my goodness! You mentioned that after about a year or so, you began
sort of working with individuals who had HIV and the AIDs virus. What
prompted that development in your career?
MS. HAGAR: Because many of the offenders in our office had been intravenous heroin
users or lived an alternative lifestyle, we had a large population who were
HIV positive. Another officer saw the need for this type of caseload and
presented it the Chief. The Chief agreed and he established a special
position called an HIV Specialist. Since the HIV Specialist had so many
cases, we needed someone else to help supervise these cases, and that
someone was me.
MR. HAMROCK: What did you find were some of the special concerns and issues that you
had to face with that population?
MS. HAGAR: They were unable to work, had no income, oftentimes no housing, and no
health insurance. Getting public assistance was difficult, because most of
them were men and historically, women received public assistance and
men did not. I remember that the Whitman Walker Clinic helped my
offenders tremendously. I would take them there or tell them to meet me
there and there would be someone at the clinic who would just take over.
48
They would make sure that the individual got food, medical attention, and
most importantly, they would talk to them. The community partners that
we established as probation officers were so helpful. Although our goal is
to help them while they are on supervision, you want them linked with
community agencies because once the term of supervision is done, you
want them to be able to still get the assistance they need.
Having a place to live was often an issue. Because many of them had been
to prison, created problems within the family due to their criminal
lifestyle, then returned home with AIDS, many families and society as a
whole shunned them. Sadly, housing is still a problem for people who are
returning from prison. They had so many things going against them, their
health and criminal background. It was difficult and sad.
MR. HAMROCK: Did the individuals, I am just curious in terms of the way they contracted
it? Is that usually something that happened while they were incarcerated?
MS. HAGAR: No, usually before.
MR. HAMROCK: How long did you serve as a Line Officer there?
MS. HAGAR: Three years.
MR. HAMROCK: So that would have taken it up to about 1991?
MS. HAGAR: Correct. In 1991, I was promoted to Federal Sentencing and Guideline
Specialist. The Federal Sentencing Guidelines had passed and we had just
began writing presentence investigation reports that included the new
guidelines. The federal judiciary saw the need to have probation officers
who were well versed in calculating the sentencing guidelines. I learned
49
the sentencing manual thoroughly. I did a temporary duty assignment at
the Sentencing Commission for six weeks and I worked on the sentencing
hotline. Officers and attorneys from all over the country would call the
Sentencing Commission. I found it so interesting to research cases, add
the numbers up, look at the case law, and apply the guidelines. This was
something that I really enjoyed doing. However, I always thought that the
guidelines were far too harsh. Specifically, the crack guidelines were
really harsh. But in recent years, the crack guidelines were lowered by
Congress.
When I first began applying the guidelines, almost everyone that I did a
presentence investigation on was subject to a mandatory minimum prison
term of five, ten, twenty years or more. First time offenders, young men
who had never committed a crime, were sentenced to five years. Judge
Oberdorfer taught a class at one of the local law schools. Occasionally, he
would ask me to give the class information about how the guidelines are
applied. As a probation officer I calculated guidelines and did presentence
reports all day long. So, I became well versed in that area. I had frequent
contact with the Sentencing Commission, and helped train new probation
officers and judges on how to calculate the guidelines. Sentencing
Guidelines Specialist was a great position, a great role.
MR. HAMROCK: Let me ask you sort of a twofold question. (1) Could you describe for us
sort of what the sentencing guidelines are, or what they was meant to be
50
back after they were adopted? (2) Tell me how much of a change was that
in what was being done before the sentencing guidelines?
MS. HAGAR: The guidelines were enacted to help ensure that defendants who were
similarly situated, the same background, same amount of drugs, same type
of history were sentenced similarly. Prior to the guidelines, in DC for the
distribution of five grams of crack you may have received two years, and
in Texas you might have received eight. To describe the guidelines in
very simple terms, your sentencing guideline range was primarily based
on your criminal history and factors related to the offense of conviction. If
you were convicted of a theft offense, your guideline sentence was based
largely on the amount of money…there were other factors involved like
your role in the offense and those types of things…but primarily your
criminal background and the offense itself determined your sentence.
Likewise, if you were convicted of a drug offense, the amount of drugs
you distributed combined with your criminal history determined your
guideline range. Although, the guidelines took away some of the judges’
discretion, and some felt forced to impose sentences that they did not
agree with, there were opportunities for the judges to depart, but most
sentenced within the guidelines.
MR. HAMROCK: You already sort of touched on how these sentencing guidelines were
received. How did they work out during those first few years?
MS. HAGAR: As an officer, you apply the guidelines and use the information that you
gathered during your investigation. You really didn’t have any discretion.
51
You obtained the information from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the
investigator, and you received input from the defense counsel. You then
compiled a report and provided it to all the parties. In our district, we also
made a recommendation regarding the sentence that should be imposed. I
recall people that I did reports on who received fifteen and twenty years,
and even more time. I have also been here long enough to see some of
them released from prison and start supervision. It’s hard to believe that
they were really removed from society for that long period of time for
drug offenses.
MR. HAMROCK: After the adoption of the guidelines did you see an effect on say guilty
pleas or other ways in which the criminal prosecutions were conducted?
MS. HAGAR: Yes. It appeared that many individuals cooperated with the government
more, because cooperation was one of the simplest, although not
particularly the safest, way to get a reduction in your sentence. In the
District of Columbia…and this topic has been in the paper many times,
there are a lot of sealed cases, because of the volume of people who
cooperate with the government in order to have their sentenced lowered.
There also appeared to be far fewer trials and more guilty pleas.
MR. HAMROCK: While you were serving in this position did you also have a caseload of
individuals whom you were supervising?
MS. HAGAR: Not anymore. When I first started officers did PSI investigations, and
supervised a caseload. I think it was in 1991, the office was restructured
so that there were officers who only supervised individuals and there were
52
officers who solely conducted presentence investigations. So since a
guideline specialist, I did presentence investigations only.
MR. HAMROCK: What do you remember about the leadership of this office during the time
period and your co-workers?
MS. HAGAR: The office was in a bit of turmoil. The Chief that hired me in 1988, retired
in 1992 or 1993, and pending the selection of a new chief, we had cochiefs. The two deputies, both acted as Chief simultaneously. That was
somewhat chaotic. This lasted about a year. There was no true leader in
place and the deputies and other managers were competing for the Chief’s
position.
MR. HAMROCK: I meant to ask this earlier, from 1988 into the 90s the offices were located
over at the U.S. Courthouse, correct?
MS. HAGAR: Yes.
MR. HAMROCK: What do you remember about the physical space during those opening
years of your career?
MS. HAGAR: In comparison to the state of Maryland where I shared an office, or the DC
Jail where I worked at a desk or table in a cell block, or in a cubicle in the
Case Managers’ Division, my physical space at the US Courthouse was
great. I had my own spacious office located on the second floor of the
courthouse. Although it’s old, our courthouse is well maintained. The
local police department, Superior Court, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office
are all within walking distance. Whenever I had to appear in court, I
53
didn’t have to leave the building, since the judges were upstairs or
downstairs. The physical location of the office was very convenient.
MR. HAMROCK: Also during this time period again, I’m talking late 80s, early 90s, what do
you remember about the DC legal community, or DC general during that
time period?
MS. HAGAR: The school system was poor and most of the people on supervision were
products of the DC school system. Many were dropouts, and if they had a
tenth grade education they were probably reading on a fifth grade level.
One of the things that stood out to me was the deficiencies in the school
system. Regarding the politics of the city, I did not pay too much attention
to the politicians. My focus was primarily on the agencies in the city and
the services that they were able to provide.
MR. HAMROCK: These days DC seems to be going through a resurgence and a popularity
of actually people living in the city. I understand back during that time
period in the late 80s and early 90s that was not the case. Do you have
any reflections on sort of city life?
MS. HAGAR: There were never more than five people in our office who lived in the city
at that time. And even now, out of a staff of almost fifty people, maybe
two live in the city. Housing in the city is very expensive. I don’t
remember any of us coming back into the city after work. We did go out to
eat lunch or at lunchtime go to the museums. We were in the community
during the day doing our field work, but at night, rarely did I hear of
54
anyone coming back into the city. It’s different now because the city has a
true nightlife. The city has changed dramatically since the 90s.
MR. HAMROCK: For those individuals from your office who was supervising, would they
come into the office, would the field officers go out and visit the people
being supervised, or both?
MS. HAGAR: Both. They had to come to the office and we were required visit them at
their home and job. In the office, we were able to talk with them about
things that we would not talk about with other family members present.
You really don’t know what’s going on until you see where and how they
lived and where they worked. You talked with their family members, their
employer – if the employer was aware the person was on supervision.
MR. HAMROCK: These days with all of the technology and so forth that are in the offices, I
imagined it was quite a different experience during the 80s and early 90s.
What do you recall at the Probation Office that technology have now that
you didn’t have then that you had to do without?
MS. HAGAR: Of course we didn’t have cell phones. So, when the buildings were locked
and usually they were locked, you had to bang on the door or either you
had to let the person know that you were coming on a certain day and
time. We were required to and made unannounced visits as well. When
you made those unannounced visits, you had to wait for someone to come
open the door and or you followed someone in.
In those days, the files we maintained on offenders were very thick files.
We used a Dictaphone, and a secretary would type our notes, memos, and
55
reports and place these papers in the files. Everything is maintained in an
electronic database now and we use mobile devices to record our work and
write documents. I can go into my iPad or laptop at any time and get
information about someone on supervision.
MR. HAMROCK: During these early years at the probation office, what interactions did you
have with other probation officers, or other law enforcement agencies
around the country?
MS. HAGAR: I interacted with other offices and law enforcement agencies all the time.
Since our office is located between Eastern District of Virginia and
Maryland, we have always had a close relationship with our neighboring
sister agencies. We have done trainings and have held joint conferences.
The U.S. Probation Office is a national system. So, when there are events
in other cities, like trainings and conferences, we go, we meet, we get
know each other. We also maintain a close relationship with CSOSA,
which is the city’s local probation office. Oftentimes, we are supervising
the same people, since a person may be on supervision for both a
conviction in Superior Court and in our court as well. I work to keep a
good relationship with all of the surrounding probation agencies and with
the police department. Also, since most of the officers in our office came
from the state of Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina state agencies, we
have ties with the surrounding states agencies as well.
MR. HAMROCK: You mentioned the law enforcement agencies, there are so many law
enforcement agencies here in the District of Columbia. What are your
56
recollections regarding dealing with the different law enforcement
agencies here?
MS. HAGAR: Primarily, we dealt a lot with the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department
and the FBI because these agencies are the ones who investigated most of
the crimes that involve the individuals we have on supervision. The FBI
agents and police officers had put a lot of time into their investigations and
they wanted to make sure that when we did the presentence report, that we
got that information right. They wanted to make sure that we were
accurate when it came to informing the court about the offense, victim,
and the victim’s losses. All of the law enforcement agencies in DC seem
to work well together. We have a common purpose and that is to protect
the community. Some of us lean more towards helping the offender, but
still our primary goal is to protect the community.
MR. HAMROCK: How long did you serve in this position? I guess it’s the presentencing
specialist position?
MS. HAGAR: From 1991 until 1997.
MR. HAMROCK: Over the course of those six years, did you see any changes with respect to
the way in which the sentencing guidelines were applied, or with the
process work?
MS. HAGAR: Not at that time. There were challenges to the guidelines and there was
always a lot of new case law. The case law helped us interpret and apply
the guidelines correctly.
57
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s talk for a little bit, we talked about your work, let’s talk about your
family over the course of these ten years. It was 1988 when you started at
the probation office? During the course of those ten years tell me about
what was happening with your family?
MS. HAGAR: Well, I have one son, Gregory. He was born during the time I worked at
the jail. When I started at the U.S. Probation in 1988, he was almost two.
In 1987, we moved from an apartment in Laurel to a house in Upper
Marlboro. During those years, my husband and I were just working every
day and raising our son. During that period, my father died in 1996. His
death was very, very, difficult for me.
MR. HAMROCK: Was his passing expected, or sudden?
MS. HAGAR: His passing was unexpected. He became sick in September of 1996 and
was getting better. Several weeks later, he then started bleeding internally
and died in December. He was only 54.
MR. HAMROCK: How did your family cope with that?
MS. HAGAR: It was very difficult for me because I was my mother and father’s oldest
child. He was 18 when I was born and my mother was 16 years old. We
were close and I would like to believe and in fact I do believe that I was
his favorite. It was also difficult for me because since he was young when
I was born, it always seemed as though he was so lively and fun. After he
graduated from college, he worked for the local government and he helped
me when I would complain about working in the U.S. Probation Office.
He would always say “how much money do you make now?” I would tell
58
him and he would say “Ha, forget it, stop!” He was just someone I could
talk to about me and someone who I knew always had my best interest at
heart. It’s hard to lose someone like that.
MR. HAMROCK: During these ten years when you were at the probation office, do you
recall any changes in the court generally, in terms of the leadership there,
judges, or anything that stands out to you during that time period?
MS. HAGAR: Yes, of course the chief judges changed. When I started, Judge Aubrey
Robinson was the chief judge and I believe Judge Penn after that…I am
trying to keep them straight. So, there were changes going on in the court
all the time, judges getting elevated going from our Court of Appeals to
the Supreme Court. New judges were appointed by the President. The
court was ever changing.
MR. HAMROCK: This was in 1992, President Clinton was elected. Did you see changes in
the court or in DC generally with the transition from the Republican to the
Democrat?
MS. HAGAR: Oh sure! Almost all of his appointees were Democrats. During that time,
I did get to see the First Lady when she had to appear in court once.
Throughout my years there, I had the opportunity to see Oliver North
when he was on supervision in our office. Of course, Marion Barry too.
There were many famous people that, unfortunately, had some you issue
that brought them to the courthouse. You just looked out the window and
would see a crowd and ask “So, who’s here today?”
59
MR. HAMROCK: During this time period, are there any problems or issues that you recall
standing out as being big, big deals, big issues that had to be worked
through that you hadn’t already talked about?
MS. HAGAR: No.
MR. HAMROCK: Well let’s talk then about what happened in 1997. You took a different
position at the probation office?
MS. HAGAR: Yes. I was promoted to Presentence Investigations Supervisor. In that role
I reviewed probably half of the presentence investigations that were
submitted to the court. I reviewed all the sentencing guidelines, the
recommendations made by officers, and trained new officers.
MS. HAMROCK: How long did you serve in that role?
MS. HAGAR: From 1997 until 2002.
MR. HAMROCK: During that five year time period, and even before, what changes were
going on in the Probation Office itself, in terms of personnel, or procedure
policies?
MS. HAGAR: There have always been a lot of turnover in the probation office.
Primarily, because no one was from here. Typically, people seeking a job
as a federal probation officer apply to major cities like D.C., and also to
probation districts located on the border to get into the system. At that
time, these types of districts did the most hiring. Then, after a few years
officers would transfer to wherever it is they want to go. Most of the
officers that we lost, transferred to Maryland, because most of the staff
live in Maryland. We were hiring five or more officers every year. That
60
has slowed down significantly. When the economy changed eight or nine
years ago, so did the turnover. People tended to stay when the housing
market crashed. They couldn’t sell where they were to move someplace
else and the hiring in other districts slowed as well. Turnover has been the
norm for our district. But it’s good because new people bring new ideas.
MR. HAMROCK: I guess during these five years when you were serving in a supervisory
role, did you have responsibilities in respect to the office budget,
procedures, those sorts of things?
MS. HAGAR: Procedures yes, budget no. I didn’t get involved in budget matters until I
became Deputy Chief, but procedures, yes absolutely.
MR. HAMROCK: How did the training during those years compare with say the training
back when you first started at the office?
MS. HAGAR: When I first started, the Chief who hired you assumed that you knew a lot
because you worked as a local or state probation officer before being hired
by him. So, I did not receive as much training here as our new officers
today. We don’t assume that they know much about the federal system. If
they do that’s good, but if not they are still going to thoroughly trained.
When I started, I walked into my office and had cases stacked on my desk.
Now, we increase the officer’s caseload very slowly and they go to a sixweek National Training Academy in South Carolina. When I started, we
went to training for a week at a place near Baltimore Washington Airport.
At the National Academy new officers receive firearms and safety
training, in addition to case management training. Prior to the National
61
Academy training, you were trained on those things within your district.
When I started in our district we did not carry firearms. We began
carrying firearms in the early or mid 1990s. While carrying a weapon was
not mandatory, we all had to attend the training. Officers had to know how
to arm and disarm a weapon, identify the parts of a weapon. You had to go
to the range, but if you chose not to carry you didn’t have to follow that
process all the way through to certification.
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s talk a little bit more about that for a while. So in terms of carrying
firearms beginning in 1992, did individuals carry firearms at all times, or
was that when they were making their visits to individual’s homes? When
would they carry it?
MS. HAGAR: Officers carried firearms when they were in the community. Today, we
are not permitted to carry them inside of the courthouse. When we arrive
at the courthouse, we must store our weapons in an area near the
courthouse’s entrance. Everyone is issued a safety vest and officers are
strongly encouraged to wear their vest at all times when they are in the
community.
MR. HAMROCK: But, not always?
MS. HAGAR: No, they don’t. I would love for my officers to wear them at all times, and
I believe that I am going to make it mandatory very soon. As soon as
summer is over, I think it would be a bit more digestible to tell them that
they have to wear them all the time. But they should, I worry about their
safety all the time.
62
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s talk about that for a minute. During the first fifteen years working in
the probation office, were there times where a probation officers injured in
the course of duty?
MS. HAGAR: Yes. A couple of years before I started, an officer had been shot while in
the field. Fortunately, he was not seriously injured. Officers have been
involved in car accidents, threatened by offenders, fended off attacks by
dogs and other things. Our system maintains a national database in which
we are required to report all of these incidents. You never know what’s
going to happen when you are out in the community, you just don’t.
Safety is always an issue. Officers receive safety training several times a
year, which includes scenarios, defensive tactics, everything. Everything
that we can possibly do to make them better, and safer, we do.
MR. HAMROCK: During this last time period we have been talking up until 2002, let’s shift
back over to your family and family life and so forth. How old is
your…your son is almost graduated from high school by this point?
MS. HAGAR: Yes. He graduated in 2004. He was at the Department of Labor, right
across the street from the courthouse, in daycare before he started school.
Our children have always been a part of our office. They come here and
we don’t restrict it. I tell officers, if you have to bring your child to work,
of course it should be infrequent, but you are to make sure they are safe
while in the office. Don’t put them in harm’s way. We are a close knit
group when it comes to our families. We talk about them, share stories,
and pictures. My son grew up learning and knowing about probation. He
63
has been in the courtroom with me once, knows what I do, that it is not
easy, and that it takes a lot of time. I guess the greatest thing that he
knows is that, I care.
MR. HAMROCK: We are in sort of the early 2000s by this timeframe, how much in court
experience did you have once you assumed this supervisory role?
MS. HAGAR: I went to court at least a couple of times a week. As a new Guideline
Specialist, maybe three or four times a week. If you prepared the
presentence report on a defendant, you went to court when the person was
sentenced. You answered any questions the parties had about the report,
investigation, or guideline calculations. Spending so much time in court, I
became familiar with the judges and vice versa. We formed relationships
because we were in chambers and their courtroom frequently.
MR. HAMROCK: In 2002, what was your next role as probation officer?
MS. HAGAR: I was promoted to Deputy Chief Probation Officer. As Deputy Chief, I
had oversight of the presentence investigation units at first, and later I
oversaw the supervision function in our office. At any given point, I
might have five supervisors under me, and each supervisor had six, seven,
or eight officers in their unit. I also supervised the clerical staff when I
was Deputy Chief. I had many responsibilities. I worked with the Chief
as it relates to the budget. I was in engaged in hiring and had some input
or responsibility for many functions in the office.
MR. HAMROCK: Who was the Chief at the time?
MS. HAGAR: Richard Houck.
64
MR. HAMROCK: How long had he been Chief?
MS. HAGAR: Since 1995. He came to our court in 1995. He had been the Deputy Chief
in the District of Maryland. He was hired as the chief after our office’s cochief period. His selection was difficult for our current deputy chiefs,
because they both wanted to be Chief and the court went outside of the
office to select a Chief.
MR. HAMROCK: Who appoints the Chief?
MS. HAGAR: The Chief Judge, with the assistance of a judicial selection panel. When I
was appointed Chief Probation Officer, Chief Judge Hogan was the Chief
Judge. Since his term was about to end and Judge Lamberth was to be the
next Chief Judge, Judge Lamberth headed the selection panel. My
selection panel also consisted of Judge Henry Kennedy and Judge
Rosemary Collyer.
MR. HAMROCK: Once you took over as Deputy Chief, how did your experiences change at
the Probation Office in terms of just day to day activities?
MS. HAGAR: A lot more responsibilities and more meetings. The Deputy Chief’s role is
to make sure nothing “falls through the cracks.” I was always looking at
our procedures, our processes, and engaging with the outside agencies. So
a lot! A lot of meetings. You had to meet with the supervisors to make
sure they were doing things consistently and according to policy.
Reviewing policies, conducting audits, troubleshooting for the Chief,
resolving issues, handling complaints, meeting with the judges, helping to
65
train new officers, training new supervisors, hiring at every level, from
support staff to supervisors, as Deputy Chief, I did a lot.
Despite all the work, the Deputy Chief position was one of the best
positions I held. I say that because the supervisors take the heat from the
line staff and the chief takes the heat from the top. As the deputy, you are
kind of in the middle. I mean you have a lot of influence as the deputy
chief, but you are insulated to some degree. Of all of the positions that I
have held being the Deputy Chief, was the best.
MR. HAMROCK: Is there only one Deputy Chief?
MS. HAGAR: No two.
MR. HAMROCK: There are two?
MS. HAGAR: Sometimes there is just one. When I became Chief, I only had one deputy.
Our office has decreased in size and at some point in the 90s, there were
about 120 staff members. Today, we have 49, and that has a lot to do with
technology, as well as a decrease in crime in the city. Before computers,
we had one clerical person for every three officers. Today, I have one
clerical person for seven or eight people because now officers are using
the computer to type their own work. We had data quality analysts,
people who would enter things into the computer for us. We don’t do even
have those positions in the office anymore. A lot of things have been
streamlined because of technology. The number of people we supervise
has decreased because many of the individuals who were sentenced in our
court are not returning to the District when they are released. The cost of
66
living here is so high. Or, they don’t return to the city because they have
been away so long and their family has moved.
MR. HAMROCK: You know that raises a good question, one that I have not thought of
before. When individuals are sentenced here in the District, is there a
standard place of incarceration? Or, how is that determined?
MS. HAGAR: That’s determined by the Bureau of Prisons. The prison that a person is
committed to is based on several factors. The Bureau of Prisons considers
the offense, the inmate’s needs, separation issues, prior record, and other
factors…a process the BOP calls classification. An inmate’s classification
determines where they will be housed. If you have a severe mental
problem, you will be at a prison that is equipped to handle your mental
health needs. They try to house you close to your home, if they can, but
by no means are they obligated to do so. But they try to do so.
MR. HAMROCK: In the office you said there was two Deputy Chiefs, did they both have the
same responsibilities, or was there a division of labor?
MS HAGAR: There was a division of labor. At one point, I was Deputy Chief over all
of the supervision services. I had oversight of all the officers, clerical staff,
and supervisors who were responsible for anyone who was on probation,
parole, supervised release or any type of community supervision. The
other Deputy Chief had oversight of the Presentence Investigation Units.
At one point, I had oversight of the Presentence Investigation Units too.
The deputies divided some of the administrative duties as well. For
67
instance, I would manage the clerks and the other deputy would manage
HR and Training. (tape stopped) (changing tapes).
MR. HAMROCK: Go ahead.
MS. HAGAR: The duties of the Deputy Chief are at the discretion of the Chief Probation
Officer. If the chief wanted us to divide things evenly, we did, or if he
wanted us to switch, we did. We performed any function the Chief wanted
us to do.
MR. HAMROCK: I have a question that just occurred to me. In terms of budgeting and
administrative processes and so forth, does the probation office, you
know, stand alone, or does it work within the judiciary? How would the
money flow into the agency?
MS. HAGAR: We are funded by Congress through the federal judiciary. Funds are
appropriated to the federal judiciary and allocated to the Administrative
Office for U. S. Courts and allotted to our office by the Administrative
Office. Primarily we are allotted money based on the number of people we
have on supervision and the number of presentence reports we complete.
Many other factors determine our funding too, but primarily our funds are
based on our workload. I manage my budget independently. I mean of
course, we have set guidelines regarding spending and I certainly stay
within those boundaries. Our funding is used to pay for treatment for the
offenders, staff salaries, technology, furniture, just everything it takes to
run an agency.
68
MR. HAMROCK: So you became Deputy Chief in 2002? For how many years did you serve
in that position?
MS. HAGAR: Until January 2007.
MR. HAMROCK: So what I think I would like to do is sort of work up to January 2007, and
then we can take a break and see how much further we want to go today.
Tell me about those five years as Deputy Chief? What do you remember
most about that time period?
MS. HAGAR: I remember learning different things. I learned how to manage a multimillion dollar budget and how to handle difficult personnel issues. I
learned a great deal more about grievances, terminations, promotions,
hiring, and those types of things. I had a Chief who permitted me to learn
what I needed to learn to be a chief. He trained me well. Many of the
memos and things he had to do, I drafted, or I reviewed for him. Richard
Houck taught me to excel and to do things in an excellent manner. I am a
better chief because of him.
I went to meetings in the city that consisted of other law enforcement
agencies, so that we could maintain good working relationships with them.
We met with the Deputy Chiefs from Maryland and Virginia, just to make
sure that things went as smoothly as they could between our districts. As
deputy you worked to develop and to maintain good relationships, so that
things would be easier for your office and officers.
MR. HAMROCK: Looking back, rather during these five years, or even longer, 1988 to 2007
time period, that was almost 20 years, what changes did you see in terms
69
of the individuals who were coming to the Probation Office for
presentence reports, and then supervised release?
MS. HAGAR: They started to become older in age. When I started I would say many of
those on supervision were in their 30s – 40s, now 40s, 50s, and 60s. It
appears that we have an older population in our office. Their job skill and
education level are about the same. Most have little to no education and
only basic job skills. They have only held laborer positions. Of course, in
federal court we have a number of white collar offenders as well, who are
well educated and employed in mid to high level jobs. The drug of choice
was heroin for the older offenders. Then the crack epidemic hit DC hard in
the late 80s through the 90s. Now synthetic drugs are on the rise and
heroin is making a comeback. When I started, we had very few sex
offenders, now we have a lot. I don’t know if that’s because there are
actually more sex offenders, more technology that provides access for that
type of crime, or more focus on that crime. It’s probably a combination of
all those things.
MR. HAMROCK: Are there problems that they are facing now that they weren’t facing back
in the 80s and early 90s?
MS. HAGAR: Yes, absolutely! The offenders tell me that learning all the new
technology is difficult. When many of them went to prison, there were no
iPads, iPods, or cellphones. I had one person tell me that when he went to
the gas station, he didn’t know how to operate the gas pump. Just think
about that, and some have been away so long that the Metro system, the
70
subway didn’t exist. They come home and the neighborhood and the city
had also changed. If you and I have a hard time keeping up with
technology and we are in society, they have a tremendous amount of
catching up to do when it comes to that. There are computers in prison,
but they say the young ones get to the computer and that they really
couldn’t do that much when they did get to use a computer. So that
technology gap is really challenging! We have computers in our office
that the offenders are able to use to search and apply for jobs. No one
goes to a job site and submits a handwritten application anymore. You
have to be able to get on a computer, and apply for almost any job. You
may have to go to a store like Lowe’s and Home Depot and apply for a job
on their computers. This means the offender has to know how to use
technology. Technology is definitely one of the greatest challenges they
face. Problems obtaining employment and housing have always been
difficult for the person returning from prison. Those age old problems
have not changed, but there are many reentry services and agencies that
provide assistance. When I hear them talking about coming home, what
has changed, and catching up, I tell them, “Oh, I still have to catch up
sometimes myself!” They don’t believe it though. They respond by saying,
“No you don’t, you are just saying that.”
MR. HAMROCK: Popular opinion seems to be that family life these days has changed
tremendously from 10 to 20 years ago in terms of family life. Have you
71
seen that have an effect on people who are coming out on supervised
release, or what have you?
MS. HAGAR: Unfortunately, most of them had troubled family situations when they
went to prison and being away certainly did not help at all. The family
situation continues to be a struggle. When they come home, bonding and
reconnecting with the family is difficult. Sometimes, the family has moved
or the parent or someone they depended on died while they were away.
The family has high expectations for them, and the offenders feel like they
must begin work immediately and earn a salary that’s not realistic based
on their skills. I observed a lot of frustration within the families.
MR. HAMROCK: Going back to your office, I am trying to remember when the new facility
at the courthouse was built.
MS. HAGAR: The Annex, as we call it, was completed in 2005.
MR. HAMROCK: So, I am in the right time period?
MS. HAGAR: (laughing) Yes, about that time.
MR. HAMROCK: Tell me about that transition?
MS. HAGAR: We watched them dig the hole. We looked out the window for years as
they were constructing the courthouse, but it was exciting. It was a new
addition that was going to be pretty. We had the sketches of it and
everything. The Annex gave the Probation Office a lot more space. At
the time when the plans were made for the Annex, it appeared as though
our office would keep growing. So, we ended up getting a lot space.
72
However, the opposite happened. The Probation Office is on one floor and
that makes it easier to manage. The transition was relatively seamless.
MR. HAMROCK: I guess thinking back it’s sort of a wrap up question, but obviously you
can talk as much as you like about it. Going through that period and up
until the time before you become chief, what reflections do you have on
the way that the Probation Office has developed over those 20 years?
MS. HAGAR: When I started, the probation system focused on rehabilitation. Then the
“tough on crime” movement began, the sentencing guidelines were
implemented, and harsh sentences were imposed. I don’t even think we
even used the word reentry in the early 90s. Now we are shifting back.
We are focusing on reentry and rehabilitation. Even the U.S. Attorney’s
Office is involved in reentry and trying to help in our reentry efforts. So, I
am seeing this shift in our system. Even the federal sentencing guidelines
are now only advisory, whereas the guidelines used to be mandatory. I see
that pendulum has swung back to rehabilitation, which is a good thing. It’s
good because they need the help. People make mistakes and some
mistakes are just costly. The swing back is good.
MR. HAMROCK: Have you found that the community resources that we talked about a little
earlier that you worked with during your earlier years, have they gotten
stronger, weaker, or are they different, or are they the same?
MS. HAGAR: Oh my God, they are so much stronger! When I started there was no such
thing as the Mayor’s Office on Returning Citizen’s Affairs. The Mayor
established an office several years ago. We refer people there and they
73
help them find jobs and other services. There are so many services in the
city that just did not exist at all in the 80s and 90s. Employers are more
open and willing to hire ex-offenders. We have an Employer Appreciation
breakfast every other year in the courthouse. We invite the employers
who hire the offenders and thank them for doing so. People who have a
criminal record are still stigmatized, but I’m grateful for the employers
who give them a second chance. The Second Chance Act that was passed
by Congress several years ago, gave us funds to help with reentry.
Congress would not have done that in the 80s or 90s.
MR. HAMROCK: Those are all of my questions for now. Are there any other thoughts that
you have that you would like to put on the recording for now?
MS. HAGAR: No.
MR. HAMROCK: Alright, so we will go off the record for now. It is 5:47 p.m., on August
14, 2014.
74
Oral History Of Gennine Hagar
Chief U.S. Probation Officer
United States District Court For the District Of Columbia
Third Interview
June 20, 2016
This is the third interview of Gennine Hagar in connection with the Oral History Project of the
Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit. The interviewee is Gennine Hagar. The
interviewer is Kurt J. Hamrock. The interview is taking place in the offices of Covington &
Burling, LLP, 850 Tenth Street, NW, Washington, D.C. on June 20, 2016, beginning at 3:15 p.m.
MR. HAMROCK: Thank you for returning and sitting with me once again to speak about
your experiences and memories in the U.S. judicial system here in the
District of Columbia. When last we met we had talked about your
experiences before becoming Chief of the U.S. Probation Office in the
District of Columbia. I’d like to start right there and talk about your
transition from Deputy to Chief. But before you talk about that, though,
could you give me a just a quick summary of your services as Deputy?
MS. HAGAR: Good afternoon, Kurt. It is good to see you again. Regarding my service
as Deputy, I was promoted to Deputy Chief in 2002, and I served as
Deputy Chief until I became Chief in 2007. As the Deputy for five years,
at different periods, I had oversight of the supervision units, Human
Resources (HR), training, clerical staff and later the pre-sentence
investigation unit. At some point, I supervised every unit with the
exception of IT and budget and procurement.
MR. HAMROCK: In 2007 could you describe the transition to serving as Chief?
MS. HAGAR: Yes. The former Chief, Richard Houck retired in September 2006. For
several months, I was acting Co-Chief with the other Deputy Chief, Scott
75
Chinn. It was interesting, and at times challenging to have two leaders
who were competing for the same job sharing that job. However, Scott and
I were good friends, so it made it a lot easier. This arrangement lasted
approximately three months. We worked together and things worked out
fine.
MR. HAMROCK: How did the transition actually occur?
MS. HAGAR: Well, we had to interview and compete for the position. The position was
announced nationally. I think there were three final candidates for the
position. A panel of judges that consisted of Judge Henry Kennedy, Judge
Rosemary Collyer, and Judge Royce Lamberth interviewed just Scott and
I. During the interview, I do recall that they started the interview with one
question. Judge Lamberth said simply, “Gennine, tell us why.” So, just
from that one question I had to discuss everything that I wanted to say
about probation, where I wanted the office to go, what I wanted to do, my
background, and qualifications. They asked a few questions along the
way, but it was an open ended discussion and I had to throw it all in.
There did not appear to be set questions and it was the interviewee’s
responsibility to let the panel know what they needed to know or what you
thought they should know about you. After they interviewed us, the panel
made their recommendation to the bench in the U.S. District Court. The
judges voted yes or no for the panel’s recommendation and that is how I
became Chief. Good experience. It really was. However, I was nervous
the whole time. I think we interviewed in the beginning of December and I
76
didn’t find out until after the new year. I would have been good with any
decision made by the court.
MR. HAMROCK: Do you remember what you told them?
MS. HAGAR: No. (laughter) A lot of things. I talked about my background. The main
things that I recall were what I told them about my vision for the office – I
remember I said that I wanted it to be the best Probation Office in the
country. I wanted us to focus on the people that we serve, and that
included the Judges, community, people on supervision, and the other
units within the courthouse. Most of my discussion was about service.
Serving others and doing it in a respectful manner. I value treating people
respectfully. I don’t like to see the offenders being treated poorly, waiting
too long in the waiting room or anything like that. I have worked hard to
make sure that our office is professional. It is all about service.
MR. HAMROCK: Do you recall what were some of the issues that the office was
encountering at the time of the transition?
MS. HAGAR: Yes. Low morale. We rarely had money problems in our district. The
leadership – we watched the budget very carefully and because the
judiciary worked to ensure that its law enforcement component was
sufficiently maintained – during my tenure as deputy and chief our office
never had to scramble for money. We had the money to provide the
services to the offenders and to hire staff. Primarily, our budget is based
on the number of people we have on supervision and the number of
investigations that we perform. So, if someone leaves, you don’t replace
77
them if the numbers are going down. Regarding morale – the Chief that
preceded me had a different view about how to manage the staff. So, it
was a challenging time because there were many changes. At the time
when my predecessor came to our office, our court felt that the office
needed more structure – a lot more structure than it had. So, he had to
establish rules and higher standards. I can understand why staff felt that it
was a harsher environment. However, at the end of the day, our office
operated better. I learned many things from him about change and
ensuring accountability.
MR. HAMROCK: When you were appointed, for how long is the appointment?
MS. HAGAR: You serve at the pleasure of the court in the federal judiciary. So, most of
the time you are appointed until you retire, unless the judges decide that
they would like to see you leave earlier. Typically, at the point in your
career when most probation officers are selected to be Chief, they only
have several years or so, ten years maybe at the most, before they are
eligible to retire. So, most Chiefs remain in the position until they retire or
maybe until the judges say you need to go. You don’t want the latter.
(laughter)
MR. HAMROCK: Once you got the word that you were going to be selected as Chief, what
changes did you see occur?
MS. HAGAR: At first people are happy about the change. They are happy for you, and
of course you’re happy. Shortly thereafter, reality sets in and you ask
yourself, “What I have done!” Initially, because I’d been in the office
78
almost 19 years and had been Deputy I didn’t implement a great deal of
change immediately. We changed many processes and procedures
gradually over the years. However, the focus changed. I worked to have
our efforts focused much more on the offender. During my predecessor’s
term, the office needed more structure and we were focused on submitting
reports and responding to the court timely. This is still our focus as well.
We know that our job is to protect the community and make sure those
things are addressed, but in today’s U.S. Probation Office for Washington,
DC we are much more offender focused. I think overall as a system we
have become more offender focused. Today, you hear about the Second
Chance Act and re-entry. When I started I don’t think re-entry was a term
we even used in community supervision. Many things have changed in
the past ten years.
MR. HAMROCK: Over the course of the ten years, how would you describe just the general
way your office operates?
MS. HAGAR: Primarily, we operate by committees to accomplish many things.
Ultimately, I still make the final decision about most significant matters.
The decision making process hasn’t changed much from that practiced by
previous Chiefs. I’m held accountable if something goes wrong and I’m
the one going to the Judge or community to explain, correct, or even
apologize. When it’s time to make a policy or procedural change I get
staff and management involvement and solicit their advice. Still, at the end
of the day, I have to decide what we will do.
79
MR. HAMROCK: When we spoke last we talked about the way the technology had changed
the Probation Office up until the time when you were Deputy. Over the
last ten years have you seen additional changes because of technology?
MS. HAGAR: Yes, indeed. I think one of the first things I began to do as Chief was to
move our office to a less paper environment. Today, we no longer have
physical files that contain information on the individuals on supervision.
All information is entered into a national probation and pretrial services
database. We file or docket our documents electronically into the court’s
database as well. So, moving things from the paper to the automated
programs – has been one of the most significant changes. We conduct
very few tasks via paper. When I started officers, myself included still
used Dictaphones and typewriters. Now, even the individuals on
supervision are able to submit their monthly status reports online. We’ve
done well keeping up with technology. In addition to focusing on the
offender via re-entry efforts, technology has been the second most
significant change in the past ten years.
MR. HAMROCK: How has the, I don’t want to say “typical offender” since there is no
typical offender I guess, when you started as Chief in 2007 versus say,
what you see now in 2016, how would you describe any changes that
you’ve seen in the offenders who your office oversees?
MS. HAGAR: Oh, significant changes. Number one, they are older. They’ve served
longer periods of time in prison. During my early years here, the city was
at the height of the crack epidemic and there were a lot of gangs being
80
convicted in our court. I rarely see large gangs in our courtrooms
anymore. The offenders still use crack but they’ve now more moved
towards heroin again. Our revocation rates – if I were to pull them from
the early 90s and compare them to today would have been much higher
back in those days. When offenders come home now they older and a bit
less likely to return to their previous lifestyle. But, as I think about it, I
don’t recall talking to any offender who wanted to return to crime or
drugs. Most of them don’t want to go back to jail – they don’t want to get
back in the lifestyle. However, because of family situations, the inability
to find or keep a job, pressure from their old friends, falling back into an
addiction, some end up going back to prison. Overall, I would say 99.9%
want to the right thing, and live a decent life, but things happen – and it
doesn’t end that way.
MR. HAMROCK: Did I understand a second ago, though, did you say the revocation rate
now is lower than it was in the past?
MS. HAGAR: Yes. In addition, our office has far fewer offenders on supervision in D.C.
now. When I started probably 2,000 -today 800 and that has a lot to do
with the crime rate and cost of living in the city. The supervision numbers
in Maryland are much higher. The Maryland office supervises many
people who would have lived here. However, when they come home
instead of residing in DC, they move to the counties in Maryland where it
is cheaper to live.
81
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s talk for about for a bit about the U.S. District Court generally during
your time as Chief. What sort of changes have you seen in the courthouse
during these last ten years?
MS. HAGAR: Well, regarding the physical structure, we did not have the annex when I
started. There used to be a parking lot where the new part of the
courthouse is located. The old section of the courthouse was built in the
50s and there are many problems within the building because of its age.
There were plans to have it renovated, but the court didn’t get the money
for the extensive work that is needed. Regardless, the courtrooms are
awesome – they’re beautiful.
MR. HAMROCK: How would you describe any changes in either people or just the general
day to day operations of the Court?
MS. HAGAR: When I started the Court was very busy and there were a lot of trials. I
think I mentioned earlier there were a lot of gangs and the courthouse was
full most of the day. The hallways were full and the judges were very
busy. Today, not as much at all. Usually, by the afternoon the hallways
are empty, and many judges have finished sitting for the day. That’s a
good thing. Not being busy in law enforcement is a very good thing.
MR. HAMROCK: Who was Chief Judge when you started?
MS. HAGAR: Aubrey Robinson
MR. HAMROCK: And the Chief Judge today is?
MS. HAGAR: Beryl Howell.
82
MR. HAMROCK: I know there have been several in between. Without asking for too many
details, have the different personalities of the Chief Judges, do they affect
the way the courthouse runs?
MS. HAGAR: Absolutely. Chief Howell is my fourth Chief Judge as Chief Probation
Officer and probably my eighth since starting at the court. All of the chief
judges operate differently. They all operate their courtrooms and manage
the entire courthouse a bit differently. They work hard to make the
courthouse operate smoothly. Even though there have been many chief
judges, they have one common goal – to make D.C. a courthouse where
justice is served in an efficient, fair, and professional manner. From the
time I started, the judges here have been caring, considerate, and
concerned about the courthouse employees, offenders, and defendants.
Their attitude has been one of the things that has kept me here for more
than 28 years. They give me the autonomy to do my job. As a result, our
office has been able to try new things, and pilot programs without having
to go through a lengthy approval process. They are a great bench.
MR. HAMROCK: As Chief, to whom do you report?
MS. HAGAR: To the Chief Judge. I meet with the Chief Judge routinely to review
what’s going on in the probation office. I discuss matters with the Chief
Judge, tell him or her what I plan to do, get feedback, and almost all of the
time they tell me to proceed as I planned. If I think that something may be
reported in the newspaper or if they should expect a call about an issue, I
let them know. The Chief Judges have not been involved in the hiring
83
process. I inform the judge about who I hire or plan to hire and I explain
why. They will look at the credentials and we’ll discuss it, but they don’t
get involved in the day to day operation of the probation office.
MR. HAMROCK: When you became Chief you were one of two Deputies, did you maintain
the two deputy system or did that change?
MS. HAGAR: When I became Chief the other Deputy Scott Chinn became my Deputy
and I had just one deputy for a while. About a year later, he was selected
as the Chief for the District of Connecticut. Following his departure, I
promoted two deputy chiefs, Shari McCoy and Mark McCrosson and I’ve
had two since that time. The District is a great deal smaller now. So, the
Chief that succeeds me probably will not have two deputies.
MR. HAMROCK: Thinking back over the last ten years, since you became Chief, what
events stand out to you as being particularly noteworthy cases or
incidences or events that you recall in your role as Chief?
MS. HAGAR: In my role as Chief, I had the opportunity to sit on the sofa with the former
and late Mayor Marion Barry when he completed his term of supervision.
I have done that with a lot of individuals who were finishing their term of
supervision. I created a survey and during my conversation, I asked them
about the services we provided, sought feedback about how our office
operated, and asked what we could improve upon. Talking with those on
supervision is the highlight of my job. If I see them looking a bit unhappy
when I walk in the front office, I stop and talk with them, and I might
bring them to my office. I talked with Scooter Libby when he completed
84
supervision. The offenders offered good suggestions about what would
have helped them while they were on supervision or what we needed to
start or stop doing. I have a file of the completed surveys. Many of the
things that the former offenders have suggested, I have implemented. For
example, some of the white collar offenders said that they wished they had
someone to talk to outside of their family when they came home.
Typically, they might have served five years or so; lost their law degree or
were disbarred or something like that, but didn’t need a psychiatrist, drug
treatment, or mental health therapy. However, they needed to talk. That’s
how our men’s support group began. The men’s group is still operating
today and it is facilitated by the former Director of the Mayor’s Office on
Returning Citizens Affairs Rodney Mitchell. The feedback from the exit
surveys has been good, and I found that offenders are quite honest sharing
their experience on supervision.
MR. HAMROCK: You mentioned the men’s group that was started. What other support
groups or entities like that are currently existing in connection with the
probation office?
MS. HAGAR: Well, since I became Chief we also started a women’s support group. We
have a very small population of women on supervision – I don’t know the
percentage, but I know it’s very small. We started the group and an officer
offered to oversee it. We started our Work Force Development Program
since I became Chief and that’s a program in which we help the offenders
obtain employment, job skills, education, and other things related to
85
employment. I just finished a pilot with Criminon International. This
program taught offenders life, communication, and study skills. Criminon
offers a series of many wonderful courses. We just started a re-entry
court. Attorney General Loretta Lynch spoke at the opening two weeks
ago. Our re-entry court is designed to help high risk offenders reintegrate
into society. They meet with the judge once or twice or month. Every
other year, we have an employer and community partner appreciation
breakfast. The employers who hire the people on supervision and the
agencies within the community who assist us in our reentry efforts are
invited. Our judges are also invited and typically, at least seven to ten
judges attend. The judges talk with the employers and agencies and thank
them for hiring our offenders. The employers who come seem to enjoy it,
and the judges love participating. We provide certificates to all
community participants and awards to offenders who have been
outstanding employees.
MR. HAMROCK: You mentioned the latest group – high risk offenders – high risk of what?
What constitutes a high risk offender?
MS. HAGAR: First of all, they’ve served double digits in prison – ten years or more.
They have a prior criminal history of violent offenses, serious drug
offenses, those types of things. We also do a risk assessment. There is a
national tool that we use to determine the offender’s risk level. Primarily,
risk is based on the prior criminal history, instant offense, work history,
education, drug abuse history, and other areas of one’s personal history.
86
MR. HAMROCK: Going back to the general operation of the Probation Office now, I know
you’ve said there has been a reduction in the number of people in the
office. Could you just generally describe the current operation of the
office? How many people do such and such different tasks?
MS. HAGAR: The office is divided primarily into a group of officers who supervise
offenders within the community and officers who conduct presentence
investigations. There are three or four supervision units, one pre-sentence
unit. Earlier, I mentioned a reduction in our numbers. Years ago there
were seven supervision units that had seven officers each, and two presentence units that had seven or eight officers. We have an IT Department
that consists of four people, two budget and property and procurement
staff, a clerical staff of about five and two HR staff. Due to technology,
we are able to operate with a smaller support staff. Today, there is one
clerk for seven officers. When I started in 1988, there was one clerk for
every three officers. Now, the officers enter their work themselves at their
desk, on their IPad or on their phone since our national data base has a
software app. We also have two deputies and a supervisor for each of the
supervision units, the PSI units. The management staff consists of ten
individuals and the remainder of the staff are line officers, IT, or support.
MR. HAMROCK: Over the past ten years there have been a whole lot of issues involving
security issues, here in the country, here in the District, terrorism issues,
general concern about safety. Has that affected the operation of the
Probation Office at all?
87
MS. HAGAR: To some degree. Well, we’re in the courthouse, so anyone coming in has
to go through security as they would in any of the other federal buildings.
We’re not like some of the other districts that have field offices and have
to provide their own security. Regarding officers’ security, the officers
have the option to determine whether they wish to carry a firearm – about
half of them do. They are all required to wear a safety vest when they are
working in the community. We all have custom safety vests. We have a
safety and firearms committee. Officers receive firearms, defensive
tactics, and even defensive driving training. They must undergo quarterly
firearms requalification. We also have a national training academy in
South Carolina.
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s switch topics. We’ve talked a lot about your family. Up until the
time you became Chief, over the last ten years. Tell me about your
family.
MS. HAGAR: All of them are still alive and well, my grandfather included. My son
graduated from college and works for an accounting firm in D.C. My
husband and I will be married 33 years this Saturday. My mother is doing
well. So, the family is doing well right now. That is truly a blessing.
MR. HAMROCK: Excellent. I know when last we talked, I know you said you were going to
be retiring this year. What plans do you have following retirement?
MS. HAGAR: Initially – none. To enjoy life. This time next summer I want to wake up
with nothing to do. The job of a probation officer – the job is intense and I
don’t have much down time at all thanks to the iPhone and all of the other
88
technological communication devices. My current Chief Judge recently
commented that she thought we would get a lot more applicants for my
position. I smiled and reminded her that in addition to making sure that
everything operates and is presented well for the judges, there are many
other facets of this position. I have officers on the street every day and
into the night who carry firearms, who are going into dangerous
communities. U.S. Probation is a national system, so I have to stay
abreast of what’s going on in the system as a whole about re-entry, new
programs, policies, and all that. There is a lot to keep up with and there is
a lot of stress that comes along with the responsibilities you have. In
addition, we are given a budget that I have to oversee. There’s no one else
making the decisions about the money my office has been allotted. I have
a financial manager who provides great advice and oversees the financial
records. Hiring, firing, and disciplining employees are routine stressors.
There’s a lot to being Chief. But, I recognize that God gave me the grace
to handle it all. Thankfully, no one has been shot or killed, so that’s great
thing. I have had one officer die from cancer and another commit suicide.
The stress is ever present. So, I look forward to not doing anything for at
least a short period of time. I’ve started to give back some, by teaching
for University of Phoenix online. I teach Ethics in Criminal Justice and I
enjoy helping students learn what law enforcement is really like. I spend a
great deal of time trying to paint a true picture about law enforcement, the
courts, and the people on supervision. Teaching is truly rewarding, but
89
teaching and being Chief is tough. I get home from work and I’m online
until midnight. It takes that much to do it right.
MR. HAMROCK: Thinking back now, the way the system works now when someone, well
let’s say when someone comes out of incarceration now versus when that
same person might have come out during the start of your career, how do
things defer for that person in terms of what he or she faces, what kind of
resources they have – the difficulties they have?
MS. HAGAR: I have ex-offenders tell me that it’s far better for them today than in the
past because Congress and the public in general did not seem to care about
ex-offenders. Congress even passed the Second Chance Act to help with
re-entry efforts. As far as the officers, the things that we do for offenders
differ today. In the past, when they returned from prison, we would give
them leads about jobs, but pretty much they had to find something on their
own. Today, I have an officer dedicated to helping them with employment
and getting job skills. It is different. And I think the court is different as
well. Judges seem to take far more interest in working with the officers to
help rehabilitate the offenders. For the judges in our court in DC – I can’t
speak for any place else – revocation of supervision was always our last
course of action, unless the person had done something so egregious that
they had to be removed from society. There is more help via community
resources and programs and there is more funding. Simple things, like
Metro passes – we’re able to provide for offenders who need them. Under
Second Chance Act, if they need tools for a new job, we’re able to provide
90
them- we never could have done that before. In earlier days, some officers
would come out of their own pocket to help offenders.
MR. HAMROCK: In the current world, do you have any interaction with your counterparts in
the D.C. Superior Court system?
MS. HAGAR: Absolutely. I know the Director of the Court Services and Offender
Supervision Agency well. We work together. For example, we have an
agreement that addresses a person who is on supervision in Superior Court
and in our court. We don’t require the person to report to our office and
then go across the street and report to the other agency. To be good
stewards of the taxpayers’ money, the person is required to report to only
one agency who supervises the case for both courts. Maintaining a good
relationship with the city sister agency is crucial. We also work closely
with the programs in the city, since we desire to have the offenders
familiar with these services, so that they are able to get the help they need
after they complete supervision. For example, most of our offenders with
mental health issues obtain their services through city providers. So, when
they complete supervision they won’t have a break in treatment. They are
already linked to some agency or psychiatrist within the community. We
are thinking about their welfare far past their term of supervision.
MR. HAMROCK: One of the things that has changed much, I’m sure, since you started in the
last few years, there has been a move to legalize marijuana, for example.
Do you see the liberation of that as having any effect on your office?
91
MS. HAGAR: Yes. Offenders often ask if they can use marijuana because it is legal in
D.C. We inform them that federal law does not permit legal marijuana
usage, so it’s still illegal for them. Personally – maybe I’ve been in law
enforcement too long – I don’t agree with legalizing marijuana. When I
interviewed offenders, I found that marijuana was often the first drug of
choice. So, that has tainted me quite a bit. I would not say that is going to
lead to other drug usage, but the men and women that I talked with started
with marijuana and their illegal drug usage just continued to escalate.
MR. HAMROCK: Thinking back now over the course of your career, are they any things that
you would do differently knowing what you know now or any events that
took place that you wish you could back and handle differently?
MS. HAGAR: Hmm…that’s a tough one. I would have to think about that a bit more.
Well, some of the bad experiences were good teaching moments for me.
When I started, most of the offenders on my caseload were older than me,
so they would try to take advantage of my inexperience. I quickly learned
the games and recognized the lies. There was not much I could have done
differently in those situations, other than to learn quickly and not repeat
mistakes. Even with the difficult employees – I would like to have all
employees who did their work well and didn’t complain. However, even
from the complainers, the employees who were asked to leave, or ones we
had to terminate, I learned things. From some employee’s mistakes, I
discovered gaps in our system – how was this person able to do or avoid
doing something? My job was then to seal the gaps.
92
MR. HAMROCK: Again, thinking back over the course of your career, are there any
particular individuals who stand out to you as being the best sort of
mentors or figures upon which you based your career?
MS. HAGAR: Sure. One of my supervisors, Ralph Ardito. He spoke at my swearing in
ceremony. I remember my first day on the job walking in – what is now
the annex but it was a parking lot then. I saw a red car and the
personalized tag read “Parole”. I remember thinking that person is too
much into their job. Who in the world would have that on their tag? Well,
well, that person would be my supervisor one day. Ralph Ardito was a
loud, but kind Italian from Connecticut. He died a few years ago. I
learned from him how to establish rapport with offenders. He was a white
man working with an all-black population. He loved working with them
and the offenders seemed to respect and communicate well with him.
Communication is the most significant skill you have to learn as a
probation officer – when to be quiet, when to listen, when to step in, when
to say no, and when to let them cry. I learned how to do my job well
because he made me produce my best. I remember him telling me, your
report better be right because I’m only reading it once. He wouldn’t
answer my questions as a new officer if he knew it was in our policy or
our local or national policy. He’d say, “Look it up.” Now if he already
knew it was something that wasn’t in there, he would tell me. I learned
over the years that Ralph’s way was a good way and that is how I train my
supervisors now. I don’t answer the question every time the officer walks
93
in. They will never learn what the policy is or where it is found until they
have to research it themselves. Ralph had a tough exterior, but a kind
heart. He made me an excellent officer and better person. That’s a mark
of a good mentor.
MR. HAMROCK: Any other mentors stand out in your mind?
MS. HAGAR: All the officers who trained me served as mentors. It does indeed take a
village to make a good probation officer. Outside of my family and others
at work, there is one person that I admire and he doesn’t know it. When I
was deputy and I attended one of the law enforcement meetings in the city
regularly. I used to watch Police Chief Charles Ramsey in the meetings.
Oftentimes, some individuals in the meeting would be going on about the
D.C. Police – you all need to do this, why aren’t you doing that. I
remember one day – one meeting in particular – his response to someone
who was telling him what his agency needed to do was that the person’s
adamant suggestion may be a priority for her agency right now but not for
his. He remained so calm and reserved. His composure was admirable. I
always sat close to him and watched him closely from that day until I no
longer attended the meetings. He would always respond very
appropriately, succinctly, and calmly. I marveled at his demeanor.
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s shift and look ahead now. So, if you are going to give advice to your
replacement in a few months, are there any lessons learned that you’d pass
along to him or her?
94
MS. HAGAR: Yes. Be patient. Don’t rush to make a decision. Always tell the truth.
When you can’t tell the truth, don’t say anything. Be kind and always just
work to make the best decision that you can at that time. Later it may turn
out that wasn’t a good decision, but always at that time try to make the
best decision that you can. After you make a decision, you want to be able
to feel that based on the information that you had at the time, you made
the best decision you could. Always keep your character in order –
always. And pray. Pray for the people that you work for, for yourself, for
the community, and for the people on supervision.
MR. HAMROCK: Looking ahead with the benefit of a few years of service, where do you
see the challenges facing the Probation Office, say over the next ten years?
MS. HAGAR: The challenges will center around cyber-crime and monitoring those
offenders. New crimes have emerged. As you know, some crimes did not
exist until computers were invented and began to be used by the general
public. Hacking – offenders used to steal identities, but not in the way
they do today. The other issue of body cameras and police being videoed
by the public when they are performing their duties will remain a hot
issue. I have told my officers to always assume that the camera is on.
About a year ago – someone from the community called me and said when
the officer came to his home, the offender had his computer on and
recorded what happened. Nothing bad, but I was like, hmm, so that’s
something to consider. There has been an increase in sex offenses. We
use different supervision techniques to monitor offenders who commit
95
these types of crimes. For decades we supervised abusers, primarily.
With the advent of new crimes, we use special mechanisms to search
computers. Keeping up with technological crimes will continue to remain
a challenge.
MR. HAMROCK: Other prognostications?
MS. HAGAR: The Millennials and Gen-Xers don’t come to stay. This generation of
officers don’t appear to have a problem changing jobs or leaving the
profession. When I was hired, most of us came in with mindset we would
retire from this job. The mindset of the younger generation is more like –
I’ll see how goes. If it goes ok, I’ll stay, but if there is a better
opportunity, I’m gone. Also, because they are so accustomed to
communicating via an electronic device, personal communication skills
are somewhat diminished. I witness that some would rather carry on a
conversation via email than walk down the hall to talk to another person.
Personal communication skills are crucial when you are providing services
and supervising someone. You shouldn’t do it via a text. You have to talk
to people in person to address critical life issues.
MR. HAMROCK: Let’s pursue that just a little bit. Because I hadn’t thought about that
before, but I know you’ve said in your past sessions here that the personal
touch, the personal interaction with the offenders is so critical at all stages
and you’re right at least the perception is the younger generation is less
skilled than that because they are more focused on devices. What kind of
96
advice would you give to the new Chief on how to train new probation
officers in this case?
MS. HAGAR: Pretty much the same way we were trained. We were taught to develop
our interpersonal skills. As part of our training, our supervisors would
watch you interact with people, watch you conduct a pre-sentence
investigation, go with you when you visited the offender’s home, and give
you honest feedback. Simple things like – when a person starts to cry,
stop interviewing. I mean, some things you’d think people would just
know, but they do not. Instead of just plugging through and ignoring the
person’s emotions, acknowledge what is happening, and show
compassion. Interviewing skills and using emotional intelligence are key.
MR. HAMROCK: I wonder, I know you said earlier, that typically the offenders seem to be
older now. I guess at some point that will change and they will become
younger again. I wonder how that, I don’t want to say shorter attention
span – that’s probably not quite right, but I wonder how the new
generation of offenders will interact with their probation officers, if they
will be…
MS. HAGAR: They might be fine with the texts and who knows? I’ll keep an eye on it.
MR. HAMROCK: Interesting.
MS. HAGAR: It is. It is.
97
Oral History Of Gennine Hagar
Chief U.S. Probation Officer
United States District Court For the District Of Columbia
Fourth Interview
February 9, 2017
This is the fourth interview of Gennine Hagar in connection with the oral history project of the
Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit. The interviewee is Gennine Hagar. The
interviewer is Kurt Hamrock. The interview is taking place in the offices of Covington &
Burling, 850 Tenth St. NW, Washington, DC, on February 9, 2017, beginning at 4:45 p.m.
MR. HAMROCK: Ms. Hagar, thank you for returning and joining with me for what should
be the final session of this oral history. Thank you, not only for today, but
for taking the time over the last several sessions to come and sit with me
and talk about your memories and experiences as Chief Probation Officer
for the District of Columbia as well as your prior jobs here in the District
of Columbia. It has been an amazing experience for me to hear about your
experiences.
MS. HAGAR: Thank you, it has been my pleasure.
MR. HAMROCK: When we were finishing up our last session, we talked about your
responsibilities as Chief Probation Officer, your life lessons that you
learned there. I would like to spend a few more minutes talking about the
end of your term as Chief Probation Officer, and your transition to
retirement. Congratulations, by the way. Let me start by asking you to
describe for me, when the time came, that you knew that it was time for
retirement. Why did you decide to retire?
MS. HAGAR: That’s a good question. I felt that it was a good time to leave. I had been
in the Probation Office almost 30 years and I was looking forward to
98
retirement. I had been the Chief for ten years. There were people in place
to lead the office. It felt right.
MR. HAMROCK: What was the process that was followed for you to retire and for your
replacement to be selected?
MS. HAGAR: After I informed the Chief Judge that I wished to retire, my retirement was
announced and the selection process for a new chief began. The chief
judge permitted me to have a lot of input regarding my successor. I
drafted some of the interview questions and sat in on the interviews with
the candidates. The Court made its selection in July, and until I left in
December, I worked with the new Chief. So, that was good. The
incumbent chief had been in the office for seventeen years; he was
familiar with the office; and he had been a supervisor and my deputy. He
was ready to step into the position. It was good to have someone take my
job who knew what to do, and who had a good relationship with the court
staff. So, it worked out.
MR. HAMROCK: Who was that?
MS. HAGAR: Brian Shaffer.
MR. HAMROCK: Were there other candidates?
MS. HAGAR: Yes.
MR. HAMROCK: If you would, at the time of your retirement, how would you contrast the
office and its functions versus when you first started?
MS. HAGAR: There was no technology when I started. The secretaries were still using
typewriters, and when I first started, they still used carbon paper. It was a
99
couple years later, maybe ’91, before we even obtained our first
computers. There were no cell phones, computers, and none of the
reports, case files, or information we maintained were automated. Today,
practically everything is automated or maintained electronically.
The work itself and the interactions we have with the offenders remain
relatively consistent. Learning how to establish a rapport and find services
for them are constants. However, how we maintain and process our
documents changed tremendously. When I started, we had a paper file for
each person under supervision, when I left we were basically a paperless
office. Technology did change some aspects of how we supervised
people. We have people on GPS monitoring and individuals are able to
submit monthly supervision reports online. They still have to report to see
their officer, but they can submit some of the paperwork online.
MR. HAMROCK: Interesting. With the advent of that technology, did you find that the
individuals the officers supervised, did they had access to that technology?
Did they understand it? Were they able to . . .
MS. HAGAR: Initially, the individuals on supervision did not have access to any
technology we were using. As time progressed, electronic programs were
developed for those on supervision. As it pertains to the probation officers,
we first started using computers in 1991 or so. Most of the older officers
did not embrace the technology readily. Many thought that a secretary still
should type their work. As younger officers joined the ranks, they were
more familiar with technology and welcomed its use
100
MR. HAMROCK: What about the individuals who were being supervised? Were they able to
use the technology?
MS. HAGAR: Many were not able to use the technology at first. We had to show most of
them how to navigate the programs. Because most of them had been in the
custody for several years and some for decades, they had very little
ongoing access to computer technology. Also, most did not have their own
computers at home.
MR. HAMROCK: After your retirement, or I guess before your retirement, you had a
retirement celebration at the US Courthouse. What were your
recollections of that?
MS. HAGAR: I would have really preferred to leave quietly, without a huge celebration.
Family, friends, and court staff insisted, so I had a retirement ceremony. In
hindsight, I am glad that I did. My family members were there, including
my grandfather, high school and college friends, courthouse family, and
people from various professions that I met during my career. My biggest
takeaway from it all–I never realized how many lives I had touched. To
have a couple hundred people come to a ceremony on a Thursday
afternoon in November to celebrate my career was beyond touching.
MR. HAMROCK: What day did you actually end work?
MS. HAGAR: December 31, 2016.
MR. HAMROCK: What have you been doing since then?
MS. HAGAR: For about a month, I simply relaxed and enjoyed doing nothing. I recall
one night realizing that I had only one message on my phone and the only
101
emails I had received were from Groupon. That was nice! Then, there
have been times when it feels like I am forgetting to do something or to
call someone back and I start to panic. It’s all part of detoxing from an
intense career. Retirement is a significant shift in my life, but it’s a good
thing. It’s good to rest, sleep in, and just watch commuting traffic on TV
and not be in it. I gave my job my best and it took a lot of my time. So, it
takes some time to detox. It really does.
MR. HAMROCK: I understand the detox is now complete, because you are starting a new
job?
MS. HAGAR: Yes, during the Christmas holiday season, I ran into the owner of a
women’s halfway house in DC. She was in need for a new director and
convinced me to take a one-year position, until they can find a permanent
director. I am looking forward to it and I’m actually very excited about it.
I already see things that I would like to do help improve the halfway
house.
In probation and law enforcement in general, the work that I did gave me
such a sense of purpose that I often ended my day feeling better than I did
when I entered the door. It seems to be that way in many helping
professions.
MR. HAMROCK: As the temporary director of the halfway house, what will be your
responsibilities?
MS. HAGAR: To oversee the staff and all of the operations of the halfway house.
MR. HAMROCK: It sounds not so much like a retirement as a change of position?
102
MS. HAGAR: Trust me. It feels like retirement. The positions are significantly different.
Right now there are about forty women in the halfway house. As a
probation officer, I was responsible for that many people on my caseload.
MR. HAMROCK: Looking back over the course of the last thirty years, I would be curious to
know, what stands out to you? It has been a long time, there have been so
many people, events, and changes, what stands out to you in terms of
memories of those years?
MS. HAGAR: I was employed at the Probation Office so long, I was able to see people
who entered prison or started the supervision process in the 80s, and see
them again 25 years later. I was fortunate to witness people undergo
positive change and progress. Unfortunately, seeing some of them as they
aged and remained within the criminal justice system their whole life is
embedded in my memory as well. The events and changes that stand out –
the AIDS epidemic and the ostracism that was associated with the disease;
crack – severe addictions and long prison sentences; technology -it
changed and continues to change everything; and the return to focusing on
rehabilitation and treatment.
MR. HAMROCK: Do you feel that the way the criminal justice system treats those
individuals now is better or worse than the way it did 30 years ago?
MS. HAGAR: Better. Many of today’s programs and treatment opportunities for those in
the criminal justice system neither existed 30 years ago, nor did they
receive the degree of funding or community support that they do today.
103
There was no Second Chance Act – no Reentry Courts. Harsh mandatory
minimum sentences were corrected. So, it’s better.
MR. HAMROCK: Do you have any reflections on the sorts of crimes that you saw 30 years
ago versus the sorts of crimes that you see now in the District, in terms of
the individuals whom your office supervises?
MS. HAGAR: Yes. The drug offenses remain. However, the type of drugs have changed.
Crack cocaine offenses overwhelmed our courts 30 years ago. Today,
synthetic drugs and heroin are significant. Now more than ever, our
system is inundated with immigration and sex offenses. However, in the
District, the drug offenses and fraud are still most prevalent.
MR. HAMROCK: I think you said that the number of supervised individuals has gone down
during the course of your tenure. What do you attribute that to?
MS. HAGAR: The crime rate has gone down in the District of Columbia. When I started
in 1988, DC was the “murder capital,” and the crack epidemic was in its
early stages. Since the late 80’s, the city’s demographics have changed;
many public housing units have been demolished; and the cost of living in
the city is exorbitant for returning citizens. The people getting out of
prisons are moving farther out of the city into the surrounding counties.
Also, we now only supervise individuals who actually live in the District.
At one point, if a person lived in border counties like Prince George’s and
Montgomery, but were sentenced in DC, our office would supervise the
case. Primarily, because in earlier years, the people under supervision
often moved back and forth between the city and the neighboring counties.
104
Now, if they move out of the city, they tend to not move back. Now,
when they move out of the District, we transfer the supervision of the case
to the jurisdiction where the person resides.
MR. HAMROCK: Well, I have reached the end of my questions, but I wanted to give you the
opportunity if there are any thoughts you had about your career, during
this interview process is there anything that we haven’t covered that you
would like to mention?
MS. HAGAR: I was fortunate to be chosen to lead a criminal justice organization. I
prayed that God would help me make good decisions for my staff, the
community, and for the individuals on supervision. Actually, God did
above what I could ask or ever imagine. It was an awesome journey and
I’m grateful for those who were sent to help me along the way.
MR. HAMROCK: Thank you very much. We will stop the recording at 5:08 p.m.
A-1
Oral History of Gennine Hagar
Index
addictions, 105
AIDS, 33, 43, 49, 105
Ardito, Ralph, 94-95
Barry, Marion, 36, 60, 85
Bureau of Prisons (BOP), 68
Chinn, Scott, 77, 85
Clinton, Hillary, 60
Clinton, William, 60
Collyer, Rosemary, 66, 77
communication skills, 95, 98
crack, 33, 50-51, 71, 82, 105-06
See also illegal drugs
crime rate in the District of Columbia, 106
Criminon International, 87
CSOSA (Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency), 57
District of Columbia Superior Court, 92, 108
drug offenses, 52, 88, 106
firearms, 25, 62-63, 89-90
Hagar, Charles (Chuck) (husband), 22
Hagar, Gennine – Personal
birth Salisbury, MD, 1
childhood Pocomoke City, MD, 1
church experience, 3-7, 10-11, 41
grandparents, 2-7, 9-10, 15, 38, 90, 103
high school, 11
Daughters of the American Revolution Award, 6
salutatorian, 3
memories of migrant workers, 13
memories of segregation, 4
sports, 3, 13
summer jobs, 8
Towson University, 12
college experience, 16
Delta Sigma Theta sorority, 17-19, 21
A-2
race relations at Towson, 21
Hagar, Gennine – Professional
District of Columbia Department of Corrections, 33
Maryland Parole and Probation Office, 20, 22
rehabilitation of offenders, 92
teaching Ethics in Criminal Justice, 91
technological crimes, 97
U.S. Probation Office
changes and developments over the years, 74, 82
office more offender focused, 80
Chief Probation Officer, 66, 69, 100
Deputy Chief Probation Officer, 65, 76
women’s halfway house director, 104
Work Force Development Program, 87
Hagar, Gregory (son), 6, 38, 58
high risk offenders, 87-88
Hogan, Thomas, 66
Houck, Richard, 65, 70, 77
Howell, Beryl, 84
illegal drugs, 38, 43, 45, 51, 71, 82, 94, 106
Jones, Leroy, 24
Kennedy, Henry, 66, 77
King, Martin Luther, 4
Lamberth, Royce, 66, 77
Libby, I. Lewis (“Scooter”), 86
Lynch, Loretta, 87
mandatory minimum sentences, 106
marijuana, 45, 93
Mark McCrosson, 85
Maryland Department of Parole and Probation Office, 16, 26, 28-29
Mayor’s Office on Returning Citizen Affairs, 75, 86
Milbourne, Donald (maternal grandfather), 2, 5-7, 9-10, 15, 90, 103
Milbourne, Elsie (maternal grandmother), 2, 5, 7, 9-10, 38
Milbourne, Geraldine (mother), 1-2, 4-5, 6, 9-10, 38, 59, 90
millennials and gen-Xers, 98
Mitchell, Rodney, 86
Moore, Solona, 45
National Training Academy, 62
North, Oliver, 60
Oberdorfer, Louis, 50
A-3
Parker, Barrington, 46
Penn, John, 59
Poole, Randall (stepfather), 2
Ramsey, Charles, 96
rehabilitation and treatment, 74, 92, 105
Robinson, Aubrey, 59, 84
Second Chance Act, 75, 80, 91, 106
segregation, 4-5
Selby, Alphonso (father), 1, 2,9
death, 58
Selby, Randall, 2
Selby, Tammy, 2
Shaffer, Brian, 101
Shari McCoy, Shari, 85
technology, 55, 67, 69, 71, 81, 88, 102-03, 105
U.S. Attorney’s Office, 52, 54, 74
U.S. Probation Office, 27, 42, 44-45, 56, 59, 76, 80
staff morale, 78
staff turnover, 61
U.S. Sentencing Commission, 50, 51
Wesley, Eugene, 40
Whitman Walker Clinic, 49
Gennine Hagar
Gennine Hagar was the Chief United States Probation Officer for the District of Columbia from
January 2007 until her retirement on December 31, 2016. As chief, Mrs. Hagar was responsible
for providing executive leadership and management for all operations of the U.S. Probation
Office in Washington, D.C. She is the first woman to serve the U.S. District Court for the District
of Columbia in this capacity.
Ms. Hagar began her law enforcement career in 1982 as a parole and probation agent for the
State of Maryland. From 1985 until 1988, she worked as a case manager at the District of
Columbia Jail for the D.C. Department of Corrections. In April 1988, she was appointed as a
United States Probation Officer. For three years while she was a U.S. Probation Officer, she
supervised a caseload comprised of persons infected with the HIV virus. In 1991, she was
promoted to the first Sentencing Guidelines Specialist position in the U.S. Probation Office for
the District of Columbia. During this period, she also served on the first Probation Officers’
Advisory Group to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. In 1997, Chief Hagar was promoted to
supervisor and in January 2002, she was promoted to deputy chief. As deputy chief, she had
oversight of the presentence and supervision officers, clerical staff, and other administrative
personnel. Throughout her tenure with the federal judiciary, Ms. Hagar has served on many
special advisory groups and committees. She is the recipient of numerous awards for her
outstanding service to the judiciary.
During her tenure as Chief U.S. Probation Officer, Mrs. Hagar was a professor for the University
of Phoenix and taught Ethics in Criminal Justice courses for the university. Following her
retirement from the federal judiciary, Mrs. Hagar also served the Washington D.C. community
as the Director of the Fairview Residential Reentry Center for Women.
Chief Hagar graduated from Pocomoke High School in 1978 as the salutatorian of her class. In
1982, she graduated from Towson University with a degree in Sociology and Criminology. She
obtained a Masters Degree in Organizational Management from the University of Phoenix.
B-1
Contact
www.linkedin.com/in/kurthamrock-2b88ba1 (LinkedIn)
Top Skills
Litigation
Intellectual Property
Corporate Law
Kurt Hamrock
Senior Counsel, Boeing Space, Intelligence & Weapon Systems
Washington, District of Columbia, United States
Summary
Counsel with extensive law firm and in-house experience advising
corporate clients on risk mitigation, regulatory compliance, and
litigation matters involving both government entities and private
parties. Currently serving as Senior Counsel for Boeing’s Space
and Launch Division, providing legal and business counsel related to
Boeing’s space exploration programs.
Experience
Boeing
Senior Counsel, Boeing Space, Intelligence & Weapons Systems
December 2021 – Present (4 years 5 months)
Arlington, Virginia, United States
Improbable
Legal Director, U.S. Defense & National Security
August 2020 – December 2021 (1 year 5 months)
Arlington, Virginia, United States
Cobham Advanced Electronic Solutions
Associate General Counsel
November 2017 – August 2020 (2 years 10 months)
Crystal City, Arlington VA
Covington & Burling LLP
Of Counsel
May 2015 – October 2017 (2 years 6 months)
Washington D.C. Metro Area
McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP
22 years
Partner
2002 – April 2015 (13 years)
Page 1 of 2
Associate
1993 – 2002 (9 years)
Honorable Charles R. Richey, US District Judge for the District of
Columbia
Law Clerk
1992 – 1993 (1 year)
Education
The University of Texas School of Law
Doctor of Law (JD) · (1989 – 1992)
Southern Methodist University
Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), Mathematics and Political Science · (1985 – 1989)
Bryan Adams High School
· (1981 – 1985)
Page 2 of 2