DNA profiling connects a defendant to a 2020 shooting with significant likelihood, according to DNA analysts and expert witnesses who testified before DC Superior Court Judge Danya Dayson in an ongoing trial on July 10.
Demann Shelton, 32, is charged with three counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, three counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, assault with significant bodily injury while armed, seven counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction. The charges stem from Shelton’s alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting on Nov. 9, 2020 on the 3000 block of 14th Street, NW, in which the suspect allegedly aimed a gun at a group of five people, then opened fire. One individual sustained a gunshot wound to their right wrist.
The case was dropped a month following the shooting, but reopened in February of 2024 after new DNA evidence was recovered from a face mask allegedly tying Shelton to the shooting. Since the incident, footage and evidence collected from initial investigations have been partially destroyed or lost.
During the July 10 hearing, one of the lead detectives in the initial on-scene investigation recalled a witness interview on the scene. He said the witness saw two individuals emerge from an alleyway, which was presumed to be the flight path of the suspect. She told him that one individual had a face mask and threw what looked like a gun into a sewer.
In response to the prosecution’s questioning, the detective stated that the witness’ description matched his own from the on-scene investigation, which led him and the other detective to flag the individual as a suspect.
The prosecution asked why the second individual was not a suspect in the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) investigation. The detective stated that based on the witness’ testimony on the individual and the fact that second person was not observed in on-scene footage, he was not deemed a suspect. “It is more likely he was afraid,” he said.
Defense attorneys Emma Mlyneic and Emily Suffrin presented video footage to the officer in an attempt to prompt his memory as he interacted with multiple individuals and appeared to be taking notes.
In response to defense counsel’s questioning about whether he had spoken to one of the witnesses, the officer replied, “I believe so. If you go back [in the footage], was I speaking to her?”
The officer clarified to the prosecution that MPD has a three year retention rule for physical notes.
Defense counsel accused the officer of a Rule 16 violation, of breaching discovery rules by withholding evidence, and the prosecution of a Jenks violation, a failure to disclose witness statements relating to their testimony, after the officer left the courtroom.
Judge Dayson argued there were no violations, citing the MPD retention rule and the fact that the case was initially closed in December 2020. The prosecution added that all issues relating to lost evidence in this case amount to negligence stemming from the case’s previous closure.
Meanwhile, an MPD officer on the stand provided an in-court identification of Shelton, testifying that he would see Shelton around two or three times a week while on patrol in the Le Droit Park area. He also noted having seen Shelton on numerous occasions in Columbia Heights, a few blocks from the Columbia Heights Metro stop, where the shooting occurred.
The officer testified to recognizing Shelton due to his “distinct gait when he walks… almost as if his shoes were too big.”
The prosecution questioned the officer about a BOLO, that is, a be on the lookout flier that detectives will send to officers when looking for information on a suspect. The officer stated that he had contacted a detective regarding a BOLO claiming he recognized Shelton. He admitted that at the time, he was unaware of what the detective’s investigation was about.
Sufrin scrutinized the officer’s identification, given that he had not seen Shelton for five years. She also reminded the court that the officer did not witness the shooting in November 2020.
The prosecution also brought forward an ex-crime scene investigator at the Department of Forensic Sciences (DFS) who described crime scene photos she had taken, explaining blood trails from the victim, bullet cartridges, and recovered bullet fragments.
In their cross-examination of the witness, the defense said the investigator had been fired from DFS a year after the shooting. The defense presented records allegedly citing false statements made by the witness, as well as refusal to follow protocol, and falsification of dates on records in multiple cases resulting in her being fired.
The prosecution quickly clarified that incorrect instruction from her supervisors caused her to misdate records sent to the US Attorney’s Office, and that this error had been so common that seven other investigators in the department were also fired for the same reason to prevent liability during a change of the department’s management.
Furthermore, in her 15 years as an investigator, she has never faced allegations of falsifying her testimonies, crime analysis, or conducting poor investigations, according to the prosecution.
A senior DNA analyst at the time of the shooting who processed the black ski mask successfully ran tests on the mask but was not given a known sample to match the DNA to, and therefore could not identify the person who had likely worn the mask.
An analyst who did a later examination of a reference sample of swabs from Shelton’s cheek that were then used to compare to the samples taken from the scene to produce a DNA profile.
Then, a forensic DNA analyst stated that there was DNA from two individuals, at least one male, from both swabs. The swabs indicated that it was significantly more likely that the profile included DNA from Shelton on the mask and one unknown individual as opposed to two unknown individuals.
Parties are slated to return on July 14.
