Thank you for reading D.C. Witness.
Help us continue our mission into 2025 by donating to our end of year campaign.
By
Cameron Horne
- October 11, 2024
Carjacking
|
Daily Stories
|
Suspects
|
DC Superior Court Judge Judith Pipe denied a motion for judgment of acquittal in an Oct. 10 carjacking trial before parties delivered their closing statements
Daquan Jackson, 28, is charged with unarmed carjacking for his alleged involvement in a March 3 carjacking incident of a scooter on the 1000 block of H Street, NE.
Jackson’s defense attorney, Sara Kopecki filed a motion for judgment of acquittal on the grounds that the prosecution had failed to establish Jackson ever maintained control of the vehicle he was allegedly “jacking”
Judge Pipe denied the motion, stating it was “close,” and ultimately deciding it was up to the jury to determine whether or not possession and control of the vehicle ever shifted from the victim to Jackson.
In closing statements, the prosecution laid out that Jackson had control of the victim’s scooter while holding the handlebars because that is where the steering and accelerator are located. Prosecutors equated Jackson’s actions to jumping in a running car, grabbing the steering wheel and placing feet on the pedals even while the driver of the car remains.
The prosecution bolstered their assertions citing that no stolen vehicle report was ever filed for the scooter, which Jackson claimed was his, and “the inference [that Jackson owned the scooter] requires leaps and bounds.”
“Mr. Jackson recognizes that scooter as his,” Kopecki argued during her statements.
Kopecki claimed Jackson had no intention to hurt the victim as there was never a point in time Jackson had control of the scooter. Kopecki argued that, given the size difference between the victim and Jackson, if Jackson wanted the victim off of the scooter, he could have done it.
Kopecki finished by stating that, “No one asked Mr. Jackson ‘do you want to talk to the police’” despite Jackson’s statements on scene that his bike was stolen and the fact that “no one has seen the title.”
Parties will reconvene when the jury reaches a verdict.