Washington D.C. Woman Found Guilty of Voluntary Manslaughter in Fatal 2024 Stabbing
Vanessa Bonaparte was convicted in D.C. Superior Court for the fatal stabbing of Dwayne Boyd.
This case is not concluded. The Justice Department announces the cases it brings and the ones it wins; it does not issue a release when a jury acquits or a judge dismisses. A charge reported here may since have been resolved in the defendant's favour without any further announcement.
We last searched for new coverage of this at Aug 18, 2026, 1:12 p.m. ET — checked 1h ago.
On August 18, 2026, official records from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia announced that 34-year-old Vanessa Bonaparte of Washington, D.C., was found guilty in D.C. Superior Court of one count of voluntary manslaughter while armed. The conviction stems from the June 22, 2024, fatal stabbing of Dwayne Boyd. The legal case remains open and developing as the matter moves toward a scheduled sentencing hearing.
According to official records, Metropolitan Police Department officers were called to 3517 East Capitol Street SE on June 22, 2024, following reports of an argument. Officers observed Bonaparte leaving the scene and subsequently located Boyd unresponsive in a rear bedroom. Government evidence presented in the case established that Bonaparte forced her way into the apartment where Boyd lived and stabbed him twice in the chest with two knives after he followed her to the kitchen to ask her to leave.
Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz scheduled sentencing for Bonaparte on November 13, 2026. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro and Metropolitan Police Department Interim Chief Jeffery Carroll announced the conviction following an investigation by the Metropolitan Police Department, with the case prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Emily Clarke and Gregory Evans.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 118 Aug 2026, 16:52current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.