A defense attorney requested prosecutors disclose missing security footage and information about a witness before DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman on April 22.
Randolph Thomas, 43, is charged with first-degree felony murder while armed, assault with intent to kill while armed, armed robbery, first-degree burglary while armed, assault with a dangerous weapon, and five counts of possession of a firearm with a crime of violence. The charges stem from his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 19-year-old Emmanuel Durant Jr. on Dec. 31, 2009, on the 200 block of Webster Street, NE. Thomas was arrested in 2023 and charged for the incident.
Pierce Suen, one of Thomas’ attorneys, asked prosecutors to provide security footage from a 7-Eleven store around the time of the incident.
The prosecutor said the footage showed a person showing interest when an individual took out a “wad” of cash to pay, though the person with the cash said he was certain the aforementioned individual wasn’t the killer. The parties did not specify how the 7-Eleven footage relates to the homicide but according to a defense filing on Feb. 24, the footage is from Dec. 30, 2009–the day before the murder.
The prosecutor said the footage is missing and the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), United States Attorney’s Office (USAO), and the US Secret Service all unsuccessfully searched for the video.
Suen also asked prosecutors to disclose whether they offered benefits to a witness and his family in exchange for testifying because it could point to bias. He said the witness failed a polygraph test when asked if he was testifying in the case about threats or harming other witnesses.
The prosecutor said the witness repeatedly requested protection from threats over multiple years, and prosecutors didn’t request the witness be relocated until recently. They said threats toward the witness escalated when he came forward with information in Thomas’ case and said the witness previously requested to be put “in the hole” due to threats.
Suen said he assumed National Integrated Ballistic Information Network (NIBIN) tests did not indicate a connection between the December 2009 homicide and previous incidents because when cartridge casings are entered into NIBIN, they are analyzed and compared to prior entries, and there was no “hit” for the NIBIN testing in this case.
Judge Edelman said NIBIN testing would likely not prove Thomas’ innocence because it is considered less accurate than a human analyzing cartridge casings, and he has never seen a prosecutor’s case rely on NIBIN testing.
The prosecutor said the NIBIN algorithm may have changed since the testing was performed and said they would attempt to obtain and disclose to the defense records comparing the NIBIN entries in this and prior cases.
Suen requested an evidentiary hearing where he would call the lead detective on the case to testify, which he said would be helpful to clarify the timeline of the prosecutors’ investigation.
Parties are slated to reconvene on May 1.
