Defense cross-examined victim in carjacking case before DC Superior Court Judge Errol Arthur on April 23.
Miquel Beasley, 23, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, armed carjacking, three counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and robbery while armed for his alleged involvement in an incident that took place at the 3000 block of 1st Street, SE on March 22, 2024.
At the hearing, Beasley’s attorney, Antoini Jones ,continued to cross examine the victim who testified that he did not remember the details of the carjacking incident, only that he was held at gunpoint and his car was stolen.
“The only thing I remember was a pistol to my head,” the victim said, and “My life has changed forever.”
Jones questioned the victim’s testimony asking, “Is it that you don’t remember things today? Because when the [prosecution] was asking, you were able to answer.” The prosecution objected to this question, and Judge Arthur struck it from the record.
The victim also testified upon redirect from the prosecution that he had no doubt he was carjacked by someone who he referred to as “Quel.”
Prosecutors also called on a DNA analyst from the Department of Forensic Sciences (DFS) who testified that DNA recovered from the steering wheel, turn signal, and windshield wiper lever were likely Beasley’s.
On cross-examination, Jones asked the DNA analyst if she received a reference sample from the victim, to which she said no, and agreed that she couldn’t include or exclude it from the analysis.
She also stated that DNA can remain on surfaces for extended periods of time and may be transferred indirectly, meaning it can be left through contact with another person or object.
The prosecution also called a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) patrol officer who testified that the victim reported the carjacking around 3:30 p. m. on March 22, 2024, stating that a gun was pointed at him and his vehicle was taken.
According to the officer, the victim identified the suspect as “Quell” and provided a description of a Black male with facial hair and visible tattoos. The vehicle was later recovered nearby.
During cross-examination, the defense questioned the officer’s observations of the victim’s demeanor and pointed to inconsistencies in the vehicle’s description. The officer maintained that the victim appeared overwhelmed and confirmed that police followed protocol by not handling the vehicle before forensic testing.
Parties are scheduled to reconvene on April 27.
