Lawyers on both sides made passionate closing remarks to the jury in a homicide case before DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park on Sept. 22.
Alphonso Oliver, 35, is charged with second-degree murder, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction, and carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business. These charges stem from his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of Levoire Simmons, 16, that occurred July 5, 2022 on the 700 block of Kenilworth Terrace, NE.
The prosecution and the defense recapitulated their theories about what really happened during the shooting.
The prosecution said the defendant murdered Simmons in that after the first interaction Oliver had with Simmons and his friends, he had time to deliberate and consider what he was going to do.
He was the aggressor, the one who approached Simmons, and was the one who drew the weapon during the tussle, according to the prosecution. The prosecution argued that he also had intent to kill, which was suggested by the fact that he had shot Simmons in the head, rather than the leg, stomach, or chest.
Oliver was angry, the prosecution said, while in a store in the time between the first and second interaction. The group had spooked him, and he did not like it. His behavior, erratic and pacing, reflected it as much as his companion’s. She was calm, the prosecution emphasized, stating her behavior did not align with the defendant’s testimony.
“This story’s ridiculous,” the prosecutor said, referring to Oliver’s story that he had been threatened by the group. Because his companion was “meandering” on her phone during the time the event would have taken place, the prosecutor said it simply wasn’t plausible that Oliver had been threatened.
Oliver himself was also seen on his phone by cameras just seconds as he walked to the store, though he was apparently behaving strangely and looking over his shoulder back down the street where the group was celebrating.
Additionally, the prosecution emphasized that there were a “number of ways” Oliver could have gone home, but he made the conscious decision to walk back down the street toward the group he claimed to be scared of during his testimony, supposedly to introduce himself.
Wole Falodun, Oliver’s lawyer, claimed that Oliver acted in self-defense. He argued that Oliver’s actions were in response to threats of violence and a gun that was pulled on him first, as he had testified earlier during the trial. Oliver found himself “fighting for his life” and resorted to deadly force when faced with imminent danger, according to Falodun.
Even if the jury didn’t believe Oliver’s testimony, Falodun proposed that the prosecution did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that Oliver had committed murder. Falodun claimed that there were still too many unanswered questions—from witness testimonies to the whereabouts of the gun Simmons and another person at the gathering had been firing into the air. The same gun, he had argued, that Simmons pulled on Oliver.
Falodun was adamant the jury find Oliver not guilty if there was any doubt in their minds that he had killed in cold blood and If the jury is not “firmly convinced,” then they can’t find him guilty.
“He told you a ridiculous tale,” the prosecutor said regarding Oliver’s testimony. She suggested that Oliver fabricated his testimony because he “has an interest in the outcome of this trial.”
She also reminded the jury that the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt was not proving the case beyond doubt of guesswork or speculation.
Parties are slated to reconvene when the jury reaches a verdict.
