Judge Acquits Co-defendant During Triple Homicide Trial

By D.C. Witness Staff - November 10, 2022
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Suspects | Victims |

DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan granted a motion for a co-defendant’s acquittal during a triple homicide trial.

Rakeem Willis, 31, is charged with first-degree murder while armed in connection to the shootings of 26-year-old Javon Abney, 26-year-old Sean Shuler, and 24-year-old Tyrik Hagood on Jan. 26, 2019, on the 1500 block of Fort Davis Place, SE.

Willis’ co-defendant, 33-year-old, Jonathan Winston, on the other hand, was acquitted of this charge as sufficient evidence could not be corroborated to satisfy this allegation.  

During the Nov. 8 trial, Judge Ryan accepted a motion for acquittal submitted on behalf of Winston by his attorney Kevin Irving. He asserted that the prosecutions’ argument was “entirely speculative.”

According to court documents, Irving said, “…there is no evidence upon which a reasonable juror could conclude guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” 

The basis of this claim was not only rooted in an absence of eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence pinpointing Winston to the scene, but also the inability to connect his cellphone to cell towers within the vicinity of the incident.

Through the prosecutions’ arguments, they could not adequately provide proof of a connection to Winston’s phone number, forcing jurors to make a “speculative leap.” For this reason, Judge Ryan dismissed the case.

As for Willis, his fate remains with the jurors.

For the rest of Tuesday’s trial, both the prosecution and the defense delivered their closing arguments. 

The prosecution argued that cell tower records reveal Willis’ involvement in the murders, citing an insurance claim signed by the defendant using one phone number tied to the crime as well as an email registered under a second phone number that was also tied to the crime.

In addition, the prosecution maintained that Willis “lured” the victims to their death, engaging in over 18 phone calls with Shuler and directing him and the two other men to a quiet neighborhood where he killed them.

Willis was allegedly the last person to speak to Shuler before his death.

The prosecution closed by asking jurors to “piece together the mosaic of phone calls.”

Following the prosecutions’ argument, Willis’ defense attorney, Howard McEachern, refuted their claims, referring to them as “speculation” and stating, “They are wading in fantasy land.”

To substantiate McEachern’s argument, he cited testimony from a cell service custodian who said cell phones connect to the strongest signal, not the closest signal, suggesting that the cell site records are not the most accurate gauge of location.

Moreover, McEachern asserted that the cell phone records do not fill in the gaps, namely, a motive.

He referenced testimony from Shuler’s girlfriend in which she said that he did not know Willis, demonstrating that there is no known relationship between the men.

Based on this non-existent relationship, McEachern then asked, “Why would you lure someone to a one way street in a residential neighborhood?” This question reinforced the lack of motive in this case.

During the rebuttal, the prosecution reiterated Willis’ cellphone records, urging the jury to deliver an “impartial verdict.” He instructed them to sift through the direct and circumstantial evidence as they reach a decision.

Judge Ryan then provided jurors with instructions before dismissing them to begin deliberations.

Parties are expected to reconvene on Nov. 9 as jurors continue to deliberate on the case.