Thank you for reading D.C. Witness.
Help us continue our mission into 2025 by donating to our end of year campaign.
By
D.C. Witness Staff
- June 22, 2018
Court
|
Homicides
|
Suspects
|
During a murder trial, counsel disagreed about a witness’s prior knowledge of a 2014 murder.
The defendant, Andre Joyner, 27, is charged with second-degree murder while armed for allegedly stabbing Jamie Washington, 31, on the 700 block of 18th Street, NE. Joyner is also charged with tampering with evidence for getting rid of the clothes he wore on the night of the homicide.
Earlier in the trial, the witness told the jury that Joyner confessed to Washington’s murder while they were housed in the same jail unit. Kevin Mosley, Joyner’s attorney, accused the witness of lying about the confession. Mosley said the witness was shown documents detailing the case while in jail and was attempting to recall information from the documents to implicate his client.
Even though the witness said he did not know the details of the case, he did admit that Joyner showed him his ex-girlfriend’s cousin’s testimony from a prior hearing.
The prosecution told the judge the testimony in question did not include details about the murder. The prosecution also said the document only contained the cousin’s name, age and birthplace.
According to the prosecution, it’s possible the jury might think the witness had prior knowledge about the facts of the case via the cousin’s testimony and therefore fabricated Joyner’s confession.
The witness, convicted of first-degree murder while armed in a homicide that is not related to the case, entered a government plea deal that would downgrade his charges to second-degree murder in exchange for testimony in Joyner’s case.
Without the plea offer, the witness faced a sentence of 30- 60 years in prison. However, under the parameters of the plea, the witness could receive 13- 25 years. If the prosecution finds the witness gave “substantial cooperation” the judge could sentence the witness to less than 13 years.
D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff agreed that the cousin’s testimony did not contain relevant facts to the case. Judge Bartnoff ruled that, during closing statements, the defense cannot say the witness gathered facts about the case from the cousin’s testimony.
The trial is scheduled to resume on June 25.