Graphic video of a hooded suspect firing multiple shots at a helpless victim trying to crawl away, weighed heavily on DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt in a probable cause hearing that stretched over two days.
The proceedings culminated on Jan. 9 with Judge Brandt’s determination that 44-year-old Tyrone Spencer is likely guilty of murder.
“There are sometimes times that a video is just worth its weight in gold,” she said.
Spencer is charged with first-degree murder while armed for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 36-year-old Francois Adkins, which occurred on Sept. 1.
According to court documents, Adkins died from four gunshot wounds at the Brookland Center Recreational Center on the 2400 block of 14th Street, NE.
During the hearing the prosecution presented extensive surveillance footage of a black clad suspect identified as Spencer mulling around the facility, then pulling a gun, apparently hidden in his right sock, and shooting Spencer in the head, his forearm and both legs as he was desperately trying to get away. The footage shows blood pooling around the victim and bystanders fleeing.
The lead detective testified that in addition to video from the recreation center, home surveillance cameras captured Spencer wearing a distinctive pair of light colored, Jordan Shox tennis shoes distinguished by elevated pods on the heels. Ultimately, Spencer wound up in an apartment complex a few blocks away where a witness–a relative who the detective said, “had known him his whole life,” made a positive identification.
The prosecutor noted the video also showed an obvious bulge in the suspect’s right sock suggestive of a concealed weapon. The evidence, she said, had already persuaded two judges to find probable cause that Spencer committed the crime.
Defense attorney, Patrick O’Sullivan, countered that Spencer’s identification is fatally flawed.
Questioning the lead detective on Jan 7, O’Sullivan asked why a full face shot of the defendant wasn’t shown to the key witness who had lived with Spencer at one point.
Further, O’Sullivan queried why the witness initially needed a pair of glasses to verify the police photo of the suspect. The lawyer pointed out, given the picture, it was impossible to tell if the person said to be Spencer had tattoos, a distinctive hair style or determine his age.
O’Sullivan was also skeptical about the location of the murder weapon. “Do you have any specific evidence as to what that bulge [in the sock] might be?” asked Sullivan. The detective did not. Further, O’Sullivan said that no one identified Spencer from the footage at the recreational center and the lawyer showed a photo of someone else at the center wearing shoes similar to the Jordan Shox.
Nor was any clothing recovered from the incident, nor the gun. O’Sullivan also suggested that Adkins may have had a beef with Spencer although there was no indication of an argument the day of the shooting.
In support of her ruling, Judge Brandt pointed out that, “no one else in the video has that bulge in the right sock.” She continued that there’s enough facial video to identify Spencer as the shooter and that it appears he was, “scoping things out.”
Asking for Spencer’s release to home confinement, O’Sullivan said Spencer had just successfully completed three years of supervised release in another case.
“He does very well when supervised,” said O’Sullivan.
The prosecutor countered that all factors weigh in favor of detention. “The nature of the offense was horrific.” she said, calling it a daylight ambush.
Judge Brandt referred to Spencer’s criminal history that stretched back two decades, including a 2021 conviction for unauthorized possession of a firearm in a crime of violence. This latest charge occurred just three months after completing supervision. She said Spencer disregarded the safety of the community by “flippantly” carrying a gun and ruled that he stay detained pending trial.
During the Jan. 7 hearing, Spencer argued angrily with Judge Brandt that his case had been unduly delayed. However, he apologized for the outburst on Jan. 9 saying he was “very sorry” for speaking out.
Judge Brandt accepted the apology acknowledging that she can get a “little feisty” when it comes to defending the court’s reputation.
The next hearing in the case is scheduled for April 13.
