I received the following from a friend yesterday. It took place on the
Metro at "around 3p.m." Whom should he inform?

Yesterday I saw four teenage boys beat a middle-aged man bloody at the
Woodley Park Metro station, and a Metro worker who saw the incident  did
nothing, as far as I know, about it.  
 
The incident started about three p.m.   These four boys were extremely
lound, vulgar, and rambunctious.  The man was sitting in the row next to two
of the boys.  Between the Cleveland Park and Woodley Park stations, the man
exchanged some words with these four yelling kids, who began taunting him. 
 
When the train stopped at Woodley Park, the man got up to leave the car and
go to the next car.  However, the foursome got up and followed him, taunting
him.  At the doorway, the man suddenly turned to confront the kids.   He
even reached toward one of the kids.  That's when one of the kids uncorked a
haymaker that hit the man, who wasn't very big, so hard he was knocked off
his feet.  Then the four boys, all about 15 or 16, started to jeer at the
man and celebrate in the car what they had done.
 
At that point the three of us still on the car weren't sure what to do, but
immediately a large man in a Metro uniform stepped onto the car and motioned
to the kids to get off the train.  To my surprise they obeyed.  I assumed
that was because he was some kind of security officer who had taken control
of the situation.  Therefore, I waited for the train to
proceed downtown.  However, at that point I heard an announcement.  The
train had a "technical difficulty" and was going out of service.  Everyone
had to leave the train. 
 
I stepped out of the train to discover that the man who had been hit was
sitting on the platform in a daze, with blood all over his face, soaking his
shirt, and even dripping on the platform.  A crowd of people from the train
were now standing nearby on the platform looking as if they didn't know what
to do.  Although there was no sign of the Metro employee or the four
teenagers, I assumed the Metro employee had taken the kids somewhere to
detain them. 
 
A woman in the crowd, a young man, and I tried to help the man, but he was
in shock, confused and refused all help despite all the blood.  Nor did
he get up.  He just sat there.  Several minutes went by until
the out-of-service train left the station. About two minutes
later, another train came into the station.  Everyone but the victim and I
got on it. 
 
Only when that train left the station did it begin to dawn on me that the
four kids were nowhere in the station and that no police or Metro employee
was coming to help the victim.   I asked the man if anyone had taken his
name.  He shook his head no.   Then the Woodley Station manager came
downstairs onto the platform, noticed the victim and me, and came over to
us.  I thought he knew what had happened, but that wasn't the case.  No one
had told him about the assault.  When I informed him that someone "dressed
just like you with the same uniform and orange vest" took those kids away,
he knew nothing about it, but said that "a supervisor" had been in the
station to take the train out of service.  Yet he had no idea who that
supervisor was. 
 
The manager then called the police, who finally appeared and helped the
victim.  Yet no one seemed to know who the supervisor was or what had
happened to those four boys.  Apparently, though, the supervisor didn't
restrain or detain the kids and even allowed them to get on the replacement
train, effectively getting away. 
 
After that, I told the police what I had seen, left my name and address, and
went on my way.  Yet I'm bothered with how to interpret what happened?  
Since the Metro supervisor had to step over the bloody victim to get into
the car and tell the youths to get off the train, I'm afraid the choices are
"bad" and "worse."  The "bad" explanation is that the Metro supervisor was
trying to get the defective train out of service so that other trains
weren't blocked and considered a bloody assault "not my job."  The worse
interpretation is that he was black, the boys were black, and the victim was
white, so a black man helped black boys get away with victimizing a white
man.  I hope it's not the latter, but the former doesn't make me feel much
better.  If an employee can simply shrug off a bloody assault as "not my
job," then who on the Metro is safe?