Defense Notes Description Discrepancies in Homicide Trial

Thank you for reading D.C. Witness.
Consider making a donation to help us continue our mission.

An eyewitness to a homicide provided different descriptions of the suspect before a jury in DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park’s courtroom on Feb. 20.

Darrell Moore, 47, is charged with first-degree murder while armed, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm with a conviction greater than a year for his alleged involvement in the murder of 37-year-old Julius Hayes on the 300 block of 18th Street, NE on April 3, 2021.

In trial, the prosecution called a witness who was present the day of the shooting and called 911. In that call, he described the suspect as being a darker-skinned individual who was about 5 feet 10 inches tall.

Brandon Burrell cross-examined the witness and highlighted differences between how the witness described the suspect and Moore’s actual appearance.

Specifically, he noted that the description given to the detective just after the incident occurred was similar to the information in the 911 call. However, when asked to describe Moore in court, the witness identified him as a lighter-skinned, 5’7” or 5’8” individual.

As a predicate to additional testimony a monitoring specialist for the Department of Corrections (DoC), testified about the procedure for inmate phone calls, explaining that each inmate has a unique DCDC number used as a PIN to verify their identity. During cross-examination, she noted that an inmate could use another person’s DCDC number if they knew it.

The prosecution also called a Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) Special Agent who conducted a cellular analysis to track the movements of a phone that police say was used by Moore on the day of the shooting.

The analyst concluded that the phone’s user was likely traveling in a vehicle on the day of the incident. However, during cross-examination, Sanita McLaurin, Moore’s other attorney, elicited that the phone serviced by AT&T never pinged near the crime scene that day.

The agent acknowledged that AT&T’s 2021 data did not track app usage or other inputs, only calls and texts, meaning the phone could have been in the area without leaving a digital trace.

Parties are set to reconvene on Feb. 24.