Case Acquitted: Identity Expert Testifies for the Defense in a Homicide Case

By Sofia Feigelson [former] - May 29, 2024
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

Editor’s note: On May 30, a jury acquitted Devonte Brothers of all charges connected to the homicide of Deron Leake. Brothers is still being held on homicide charges in another case.

In a homicide case that relies heavily on eyewitness evidence, an expert in memory, cognition, and perception testified for the defense on May 28 about eyewitness reliability.

The professor of psychology at John Jay College in New York City, reviewed the identification process of the suspect in this case, assisted by various interviews with eyewitnesses, police paperwork, and body camera video.

Davonte Brothers, 29, is charged with first-degree murder while armed, assault with intent to kill while armed, assault with dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of Deron Leake, 27, at an apartment complex on the 4200 block of 6th Street, SE on October 17, 2019. Another victim was injured, but survived from gunshot wounds. 

According to the expert witness, in Brothers’ case there were a number of factors at the time of the incident that could limit the ability of an eyewitness to “decode” the suspect. 

She referred to the low lighting conditions, length of exposure time to the suspect, and partial disguises, such as the shooter wearing a hoodie, as impediments that could lead to the inaccurate identification of a suspect. 

In addition, she mentioned the impact of stress on an eyewitness in the presence of a weapon and being surrounded by multiple people, as opposed to one individual, as distractions that could divert an individual’s attention away from the suspect.

“If you have a long period of time, you have a better shot at [identifying the individual],” said the expert witness. She also stated that the shorter amount of time an event is, the less likely an individual will remember it, and the faster one will forget their recollection about it.

“Attention is a finite resource, you only have so much of it,” she asserted, adding that “If you’re looking at a weapon, you’re not looking at a face.”

Then the prosecution asked if there was one factor that outweighed all the others in hindering an identification of a suspect.

She could not choose one factor, as the process of “encoding” was multifaceted. “It’s all about how much attention [the eyewitness] paid,” she stated.

According to the witness, in approximately 400 wrongful conviction cases, 69 to 70 percent have been wrongful convictions because of mistakes in identifying the suspect. However, the prosecutor pointed out the witness was paid thousands of dollars by the defense and generally testifies on behalf of the accused.

The defense renewed its motion for judgment of acquittal, after previously being denied on May 22.

Defense attorney Molly Bunke argued that based on the expert witness’ testimony, the witnesses at the incident were “unreliable.”

“The primary information in this case is from witnesses,” added Bunke, referring to the amount of evidence based from individuals at the scene.

DC Superior Court Judge Anthony Epstein quickly denied the motion, stating that the sole addition of the expert witness on the defense’s side would not prevent a reasonable jury from believing Brothers committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. 

The parties are slated to reconvene on May 29 for closing arguments.