An analyst testified that a defendant’s DNA was likely present at the scene of a homicide in a trial before DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park on June 15.
Michael Wells, 55, is charged with first-degree murder, second-degree murder, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, tampering with physical evidence, and arson for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting and attempted burning of 23-year-old Makia Mosby. The incident occurred on Nov. 24, 2005, on the 1200 block of Valley Avenue, SE. Mosby sustained burns and gunshot wounds.
The prosecution said Wells had a motive to kill Mosby because he believed she was involved in the murder of his best friend, Michael Carter. They argued Wells in retaliation committed arson “to mimic what happened to his best friend and to destroy the evidence he left in his wake.”
A DNA analyst testified that a genetic sample on a beer can in Mosby’s home likely was a match to a DNA sample from Wells. According to the analyst, the DNA on the can of beer was 100 septillion times more likely to have come from Wells than from any other unknown person. One septillion is a number with 24 zeroes behind it.
In cross-examination, the analyst told Wells’ attorney, Molly Bunke, that the analysis she performed did not determine how long the DNA had been on the can, when, or how it ended up there.
The analyst clarified with the prosecution that she only tested swabs of the beer can and did not the can itself. The witness also confirmed she does not know Wells personally.
The prosecution then called Mosby’s former classmate who appeared in a blue jumpsuit, explaining he is currently serving a sentence for drug possession with intent to distribute, as well as possession of a firearm during a crime of violence.
“Like I told you,” the former classmate began and he testified that he went to elementary school with Mosby, however he had not been in any contact since. He also testified that he knew both Michael Carter and Carter’s killer, as they both watched him grow up. He admitted that they were both older and he did not consider them friends.
He also said he did not know any potential associates named by the prosecution, nor had he been in a green Cadillac with any of them. An earlier witness, another of Wells’ foster sisters, went to the scene along with a few other family members, in their mother’s green Cadillac and did not see Wells.
The classmate concluded his testimony by confirming that on the day of Mosby’s death, he was at his house with his mom, not at Mosby’s house, and did not have any connection to her murder.
Hannah Claudio, Wells’ other attorney, cross-examined the classmate by simply confirming that he had not been questioned about Mosby’s death until 2024.
The prosecution also called a witness who knew Mosby personally but was convicted of cocaine violations in 2019, and is on probation for possession of a heroin. He is also taking medication for a recent stroke.
When asked if he was romantically involved with Mosby, he smiled and said “Yeah we was havin’ sex.” They were involved for four months, ending in August 2005, said the witness. They did not end in a fight or on bad terms, with the witness plainly stating “it just ended.”
The witness testified he did not know Carter, Carter’s killer, or another associate. He also has never been in a green Cadillac with a previously mentioned associate or Mosby’s former classmate.
While Mosby’s former lover said they were not recently close, he described her as “a good person, a lover, a friend.” The day Mosby was killed, the witness said he was with his mother for Thanksgiving, and he was not involved.
Claudio’s cross-examination established that the witness was not questioned until 2024. The prosecution then confirmed with the witness that his answers would not have changed had he been questioned in 2005.
Without the jury present, Judge Park said he was informed that someone in the courtroom gallery filmed a portion of the proceedings before leaving with the victim’s former romantic partner. However, he said none of the jurors were on camera, so the court would not address the incident further.
Parties are slated to reconvene on June 16.
