The defense called a former detective from the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) to testify in a homicide trial before DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz on April 2.
Jaime Macedo, 24, is charged with first-degree felony murder, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction exceeding one year and attempted robbery while armed for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of Maxwell Emerson, 25. The incident occurred on the 600 block of Alumni Lane, NE on July 5, 2023.
Macedo’s defense called a former MPD detective, who was the lead detective during the initial investigation leading up to Macedo’s arrest, to testify about the investigation and reports of his past misconduct. Macedo’s attorney, Rachel Cicurel, questioned the detective about his role in the case.
Cicurel asked whether it was the detective’s responsibility to ensure the investigation was “thorough,” which he affirmed. However, the detective admitted that he couldn’t recall following up with other detectives about collecting surveillance footage from multiple key locations.
Cicurel also questioned the former detective about his classification of some of Emerson’s belongings found at the scene as personal property, leading to the destruction of the items. The former detective stated he didn’t know what happened to items designated as personal property.
The former detective also said he didn’t recall asking the officer from the Department of Forensic Science (DFS) to swab the personal property items for DNA evidence. He stated that it was his understanding that some items that are swabbed for DNA can still be classified as personal property.
Cicurel also questioned the former detective about his alleged misconduct while he was a detective. As a result, he confirmed he was placed on a non-contact status, meaning he was essentially on “desk duty,” and was only permitted to assist with tasks at the MPD office. However, he stated that he was still allowed to converse with prosecutors over the phone about the case but chose not to.
During cross-examination, the prosecutors asked whether the former detective made decisions about the physical evidence based on limited information, and he said he did. Prosecutors also asked if the detective purposefully labelled Emerson’s belongings as personal property to weaken the case against Macedo, to which the detective responded he did not.
The prosecution called an MPD officer who assisted with handling the evidence. The officer showed the jury a green T-shirt which belonged to Emerson. According to court records, Emerson wore the green T-shirt when he died.
The officer laid the T-shirt on a table in front of the jury, reconstructing it as it would have appeared before being cut on the scene. The prosecution asked jurors to walk around the T-shirt and focus on the center of it.
In two photographs the prosecution presented to the court, there was a visible hole in the middle of the shirt and spots of discoloration.
During cross-examination, Macedo’s other attorney, Jessica Willis, confirmed that the officer was not on scene when the T-shirt was cut. Willis also verified that he had not spoken to DFS, nor was he a forensic pathologist or medical examiner.
The officer confirmed that he was not there to tell anyone how gunshot residue could penetrate a T-shirt.
Another witness the defense called to testify was an employee at the Public Defender Service (PDS), who assisted with annotating video exhibits.
Willis showed four clips from surveillance footage of Macedo and Emerson walking side by side down the street and to a small courtyard on the Catholic University of America (CUA) campus. One of the clips captured the incident that occurred between Macedo and Emerson leading to Emerson’s death.
In the footage, Emerson was shown sitting on a bench in the CUA courtyard, and Macedo was pacing back and forth. At one point in the video, Macedo was shown with his hands on his head, and he appeared antsy. Macedo appeared to touch Emerson’s phone, and Emerson tackled him to the ground. The two men wrestled for a minute, and Emerson went limp while Macedo ran away.
Willis and Cicurel briefly re-called a witness to correct a mistake he made in a previous testimony regarding photos of an emergency phone column near the incident address. The witness stated at a previous hearing on April 1 that he was an investigative specialist at the Public Defender Service (PDS).
Willis originally asked the investigator whether an emergency pole was there prior to 2023, and he said yes. However, he made his testimony based on a Google Maps photo from 2024 without realizing. The investigator stated he didn’t notice the date of the photo, and meant to answer the question based on the Google Maps photo from 2022. Willis showed the photo from 2022 and the investigator confirmed the presence of the pole.
The defense and prosecution both agreed that property of Emerson was in the possession of MPD from July 5, 2023 to May 5, 2024. Following the investigation, Emerson’s family was alerted that they could retrieve the items or they would be destroyed. All the items were eventually destroyed.
The prosecution acknowledged that at the time of the incident, Macedo had been previously convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment of at least a year, and was aware of the fact.
Judge Kravitz denied the defense’s request to dismiss charges after the prosecution rested. He said that the prosecution had met their burden of proof and a reasonable jury could find Macedo guilty.
Parties are slated to reconvene April 3 to discuss jury instructions. The jury is scheduled to return on April 6.
