Shooting Defendant Hospitalized, May Impact Trial Date

A shooting defendant was recently hospitalized, causing concern about an upcoming trial date in a hearing before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on Oct. 31.

Marcus Martin, 29, is charged with assault with intent to kill while armed, aggravated assault knowingly while armed, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting that wounded one individual on the 4200 block of East Capitol Street, NE, on Jan. 11, 2024.

During the hearing, defense attorney Quo Judkins told the court that Martin was in the hospital and that she was uncertain as to how much longer he would be hospitalized. When asked if it would impact the upcoming trial date in December, Judkins said it was “too early to know for certain.”

Parties are slated to reconvene on Nov. 18.

Lead Detective Challenged About ID, Camera Footage in Carjacking Trial

The lead detective testified before a jury and DC Superior Court Judge Andrea Hertzfeld about the identification of the defendant and nearby cameras during a carjacking trial on Oct. 31.

Marcus Tucker, 30, is charged with armed carjacking, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, robbery while armed, and assault with a dangerous weapon in relation to his alleged involvement in an armed carjacking that occurred April 17 at the intersection of 30th and Hartford Streets, SE.

The Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) detective continued his testimony, which began the previous day of trial. He testified that when the victim was initially interviewed, he gave a description of his carjacker that fit the defendant’s description.

However, during the cross examination, defense attorney Jason Tulley focused on the fact that the detective was not at the scene when the identification was made. He testified that he was at the hospital after a triple shooting at the time, but instructed an officer to hold the defendant until he arrived.

Tulley scrutinized the identification of Tucker, as the victim said in a statement to the police that the person who carjacked him was wearing “black and white and gray or something.” Body-worn camera footage of the victim’s statement confirmed the description. When police arrested Tucker, he was wearing all white underneath a black jacket.

The detective also testified that he performed a search warrant on Tucker’s car. He said that he and an agent from the Department of Forensic Sciences (DFS) allegedly found ID cards, bank cards and insurance cards belonging to the victim. They also found ID cards, medication bottles and a jacket belonging to the defendant.

Tulley asked about the search of the car, pointing out that the detective did the majority of the searching, when that is typically the role of the DFS agent. The detective confirmed that this is usually the case, but officers assist with the execution of search warrants as well.

Tulley also questioned the detective on the presence of cameras near where the carjacking occurred. The detective testified that he did not see any CCTV or crime cameras belonging to MPD but did not extensively search for them.

During the redirect by the prosecution, the detective said that nearby apartment building’s management told him that the buildings have a few cameras, but not enough to catch the carjacking. The victim’s car also has heavily tinted windows, the detective said, making it impossible to see inside from a camera.

The defense’s case focused on cameras near the carjacking. Tulley called a CCTV specialist to the stand to testify about footage of the crime. The specialist said that a malfunction with the download of footage led to there only being two minutes of footage from a period of more than three hours.

The prosecutor pointed out during cross examination that there were no crime cameras nearby that would have shown the carjacking.

The community manager for Hartford Square, where the carjacking occurred, also testified. She said she provided photos to the defense showing the angle of cameras on the buildings she manages. She also testified that she believed the cameras were working at the time of the crime.

However, prosecutors pointed out during cross examination that she started working for the company that manages the buildings in September, five months after the carjacking.

The prosecution moved to strike her testimony, saying that it was based on speculation and not expected based on documents the defense provided that outlined her testimony. Judge Hertzfeld ruled that the testimony about the operability of the cameras would be stricken from the record, but the testimony about the angle of the camera will remain.

The defense case will continue during the next hearing.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Nov. 3.

Stabbing Defendant Returned to Hospital For Mental Restoration

DC Superior Court Errol Arthur ordered a stabbing defendant back to Saint Elizabeths Hospital for treatment aimed at restoring his mental competency on Nov. 4.

Darryen Kenney, 24, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for his alleged involvement in a domestic violence related non-fatal stabbing on Aug. 23 on the 3400 block of 18th Street, SE.

A competency evaluation by the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) determined Kenney incompetent to stand trial, and requested he undergo mental restoration. Judge Arthur agreed to review the findings at his next hearing.

No defendant can stand trial unless he understands the charges against him and be able to help his lawyer.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Dec. 8.

Mental State of Shooting Defendant in Question After Surprise Plea Rejection

DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt ordered a mental competency evaluation by the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) for a shooting defendant on Oct. 29 after he rejected his plea agreement made at the last hearing.

Karlos Bibb, 25, is charged with second-degree murder for his alleged involvement in a high-speed car chase that led to the death of 20-year old Jamya Williams on July 3, 2021, at the intersection of 14th and K Streets, NW.

Judge Brandt spoke with a doctor at DBH regarding a mental evaluation for Bibb. All parties agreed that an evaluation is necessary—especially with the trial currently scheduled for January, as remarked by the prosecution.

The judge ordered the preliminary forensic evaluation to occur with the doctor at DBH, who requested to personally handle Bibb’s evaluation. In order to stand trial, a defendant must be mentally competent enough to understand the charges against him and assist his lawyer in the case.

The defense team, Jason Clark and Shawn Sukumar, will send the doctor Bibb’s medical records. They mentioned specific concerns over his memory loss and apparent cognitive impairment, which prompted their desire for an evaluation following the surprise plea rejection. The terms of the plea were not discussed in court.

The prosecution will also be turning over the jail calls to the doctor. She said that Bibb has been discussing the case over the phone while in jail, including the defense strategy, his memory, and the terms of the original plea offer. For client-attorney privilege, calls between Bibb and his attorneys will not be turned over.

A transcript of the hearing where Bibbs rejected the plea will also be provided to the doctor and to Judge Brandt, who wishes to review it ahead of the next hearing.

The parties are slated to reconvene on Nov. 13.

‘You Cannot Make Mistakes’ Defense Attorney Tells Jury in Carjacking Trial

Trial began on Nov. 3 for seven men allegedly involved in a string of carjackings, with opening statements made by both parties before DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz.

Jahkai Goff, 21, Isaiah Flowers, 20, Jaelen Jordan, 20, Irshaad Ellis-Bey, 20, Taj Giles, 20, Byron Gillum, 20, and Warren Montgomery, 20, are charged with conspiracy, trafficking stolen property, two counts of armed carjacking, two counts of unauthorized use of a vehicle, four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and two counts of robbery while armed. These charges are in connection with their alleged involvement in a string of carjackings that occurred in 2023, from February to May.

One carjacking occurred on Feb. 27, 2023 at the intersection of 20th Street and Sunderland Place, NW. Another occurred on April 27, 2023 at the intersection of K and 8th Streets, NE.

A third carjacking occurred May 16, 2023 on the 600 block of Butternut Street, NW. For their alleged involvement in this incident, the defendants, except Montgomery, are also charged with two additional counts of unauthorized use of a vehicle, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, armed carjacking of a senior citizen, receiving stolen property of $1000 or more, and robbery of a senior citizen while armed.

The phrase “GTA IRL”, or Grand Theft Auto in real life, began the prosecution’s opening statements. The phrase was taken from a message sent in the defendants’ group chat, which described the carjackings the men had allegedly done and rated them according to the video game’s star system for game levels. But the prosecution was very clear that this was far from a game. “Members of the jury, you don’t carjack cars. You carjack people,” she said.

Using camera footage of the carjackings, paraphrased explanations of the incidents from the victims, cell site data, and messages from the group chat the defendants were in, the prosecution made its argument: these seven men had been involved in a conspiracy to carjack four victims, and did so armed.

The defendants acted in groups at each incident, stealing four cars at gunpoint: a green Dodge Charger, a silver Porsche Cayenne, a black BMW X6, and a black Porsche Cayenne GTS.

Summaries of the victims’ experiences were provided by the prosecution, who explained that the victims would be testifying as well. She explained that these men were going about mundane tasks: pumping gas, leaving work, going to work, and just getting home. She explained that each of them left their cars to the carjackers when they realized they were being held at gunpoint in each of these incidents.

Footage from a parking garage beneath an apartment building where Jordan was arrested by police was presented by the prosecution. The footage shows men bringing the cars into the parking garage, where Jordan would allegedly sell them from. These sales are captured either by the parking garage camera or the cameras of undercover police who the cars were sold to.

The same camera in the parking garage also depicts the men wearing ski masks and blue latex gloves, which the victims described and prevented the victims from identifying the men who carjacked them and kept their DNA off of the cars. An expert will be testifying to the lack of DNA evidence in the case, according to the prosecutor.

Due to the inability of the victims to identify the men by face, the defendants have been identified by distinct shoes or clothing items that were recovered from their residences. They were also placed at the scene of each crime through cell site data collected from their phones. The prosecutors again explained to the jury that an expert will explain the cell site data in greater detail, just the same as the DNA evidence.

Photos and videos from the defendants’ phones, some of which were sent in this group chat, were shown to the jury. The prosecution argued that these photos and videos were also evidence that linked the defendants to the stolen cars. One of these videos included one allegedly taken by Flowers, showing one of the stolen cars driving just in front of the car he was in. Many of the photos were allegedly taken by Jordan, in the effort to sell the cars.

One of the carjackings occurred in Prince George’s County, Maryland. The defendants are not being charged for this incident in DC, though the prosecution has included it to illustrate their arguments.

Donna Beasley, representing Goff, emphasized the fact that no evidence had been presented yet, despite the prosecution’s long opening statement, and that they needed the prosecution to prove every element of every charge beyond a reasonable doubt to deliver a guilty verdict.

She argued that the only evidence in this case will be from cell-site data, and will not involve DNA, fingerprint, or eyewitness identification.

Gretchen Franklin, representing Flowers, highlighted that this is not a group trial, but rather seven separate trials happening concurrently. She stated that this requires the jury to find each of the defendants guilty and that it would be difficult for the prosecutors to prove a conspiracy in the end. “You cannot make mistakes,” Franklin told the jury, emphasizing their need to soberly and deliberately interpret the facts of the case.

Lisbeth Sapirstein, representing Ellis-Bey, stated flatly that her client was not involved in any conspiracy. She followed this by saying that they will never hear anyone place him in the Florida Avenue garage where the cars were found, no DNA evidence will tie him to the crimes, and there will be discrepancies in the descriptions of the assailants in these cases.

Stephen LoGerfo, representing Montgomery, gave a brief, impassioned statement that the evidence against his client is either absent or speculative. He stated that the prosecution has admitted Montgomery was not involved in the alleged conspiracy until April, after two of the incidents already occurred. He pointed to the lack of eyewitnesses, DNA, or fingerprints involved in the case when asking the jury to hand down a not guilty verdict.

Christopher Young, representing Giles, stated that the jury needed to focus on the principles of presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt when listening to the case. He reiterated the lack of physical evidence brought up by other attorneys, but also stressed the fact that other people were in the group chat that have not been indicted and stated the prosecution was trying to “rope people in,” to the offenses by using the group chat as evidence of conspiracy.

Brian McDaniel, representing Jordan, stated that despite the long opening statement they never established burden of proof.

Pointing to the evidence, McDaniel stated that the cell site data would not place his client near the scene of any of the incidents, and that no other evidence of his involvement in these carjackings exists. Furthermore, he cast doubt on the use of the cell site data as a whole by stating that there are inconsistencies in the location of both the accused and the victim during the time of the incident.

Daniel Dorsey, representing Gillum, highlighted the inconsistencies that will be found with the evidence. He stated that in the footage of the last offense, the suspects can be seen without gloves on, yet no DNA or fingerprints will be introduced as evidence. He reiterated that there was no conspiracy, there is not enough evidence to convict, and that the jury should find the defendants not guilty.

Trial is set to reconvene on Nov 4.

Your Support Helps Keep Information Flowing on Criminal Justice

You can fall into doom scrolling with ChatGPT, Tiktok or any other social media platform. There is more information available and yet perhaps less that you can trust than ever before.

And when it comes to criminal justice, that kind of reliable information has all but disappeared from newspapers and TV.

Today, only D.C. Witness fills in the information gap to inform families, friends and neighbors about ongoing violent crime cases that hit too close to home.

Like so many, we have been hit by the drastic economic changes brought on by President Trump. And yet, this year we tripled the number of cases we covered. We rebuilt our website to better serve you, and we have huge plans for next year.

But, we can’t do that without your help.

Your charitable contribution will help us continue to produce the news stories that impact you most.

Please consider making a donation to our end of year campaign. Your charitable contribution will help us continue to produce the news stories that impact you most. The stories that often don’t get mentioned on the nightly news or in the daily paper or on TikTok or Instagram.

Your support helps us continue to keep you as well as families, neighbors, and friends updated on cases that have a personal impact.

Donations up to $15,000 will be matched, so that your contribution will have a bigger bang.

Consider making a donation to D.C. Witness today. Donations can be made here.

Judge Holds One Suspect, Delays Co-Defendant Ruling in Murder Case

DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman denied release of one co-defendant in a fatal shooting case, while deliberating the fate of the other defendant after new testimonyon Oct. 29.

Randall Mack, 42, and Phillip Palmer, 62, are charged with first-degree murder while armed, conspiracy, robbery while armed, and two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence. Mack is additionally charged with unlawful possession of a firearm.

The charges are in connection to their alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 61-year-old Steven Stewart at the 600 block of 21st Street, NE, on May 2.

Palmer’s attorney, Joseph Yarbough, called a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) detective who testified that there were two different caliber shell casings found in the victim’s apartment, a nine millimeter shell casing and multiple 22 millimeter casings.

According to the detective, a nine millimeter handgun was next to the victim and had a crooked casing inside indicating that it had jammed. Yarbough noted that the handgun was initially underneath the victim as seen on body-worn camera footage until Stewart was turned over by Emergency Medical Services (EMS).

One witness indicated that the victim was known to possess a firearm. The detective stated that he was unsure whether or not the victim had been tested for gunshot residue.

After shots were fired, two individuals ran from the victim’s apartment. One was described as an older man with a gray beard, who was believed to be Palmer. The detective stated that he did not recall a witness he spoke to saying that Palmer had a firearm.

The detective also stated that he never saw the older man with a firearm and no other witnesses have indicated that to him.

Yarbough noted that there was a bullet hole in Stewart’s apartment door as well the door to the stairwell across the hall. When asked who entered the apartment, the detective stated that a witness had entered along with the suspects.

Before the incident, the older man and another individual in a Bruins hockey team jersey were seen on surveillance footage entering another apartment in the building and coming out with black face masks, according to the detective. Witnesses in the apartment were never asked if they knew why or where the black face masks came from.

The police affidavit states that the face masks appeared to conceal one of the suspect’s face.

The detective agreed that a witness told him that Stewart kept a lockbox in his apartment. Based on surveillance footage, the detective believed the individual in the Bruins jersey was carrying an object leaving the apartment that could’ve been a lockbox.

The detective agreed that there was no indication that the older man took anything from the apartment or received anything from the individual in the Bruins jersey. However, the detective stated that the older man’s backpack appeared to be fuller on the way out of the apartment.

Yarbough stated that there is no information that the two individuals had a conversation about planning a robbery. He also questioned if the cursory review of Palmer’s phone records revealed any information that Palmer planned to rob someone. The detective responded that evidence is still being reviewed.

Additionally, Yarbough asked if there was any evidence to suggest that Palmer and Mack had a prior relationship. The detective stated that evidence is still being reviewed.

In the prosecution’s cross examination, the detective testified to reviewing the autopsy report which showed that Stewart suffered multiple gunshot wounds.

The prosecution played footage for the court which showed two individuals standing in front of an apartment door and exiting with black face masks. Other videos showed the individuals walking to the stairwell of the building, entering Stewart’s apartment, leaving the apartment, and then leaving the apartment building.

The prosecution noted that no one else entered or exited the apartment besides one witness.

Mack’s attorney, Daniel Kovler, noted that one of the witnesses knew Stewart enough to describe him as the “building bootlegger,” to which the detective agreed. The witness was shown photos from surveillance footage, but the detective stated that he does not recall the witness identifying a suspect as Mack.

Kovler noted that another witness who knew Mack had never seen him wear a Bruin’s jersey. According to Kovler, another witness stated they knew Palmer and knew Mack as “Randy.”

When asked about the review of Mack’s phone records, if the Bruins jersey had been found, and if a firearm had been found, the detective stated that evidence is still under review. Judge Edelman asked if he would know if a firearm had been found to which the detective said yes. Judge Edelman then asked if one had been found as of now to which the detective responded no.

The detective stated that he does not recall if windows in the apartment had been broken, could be opened, or had bars. He also agreed that one witness stated they heard one gunshot, not eight or more.

After the witness was excused, the prosecution argued that Mack and Palmer should remain held. They stated that this was an “extraordinarily violent offense” and that the defendants are charged with first-degree murder.

The prosecution argued that the suspects were identified as Mack and Palmer and Stewart was overweight and used a wheelchair. Additionally, they reasserted that Stewart suffered multiple gunshot wounds, two of which appeared to be at close range.

They stated that the defendants could not have been acting in self-defense given the number of shell casings found. They argued that the defendants have previous convictions and significant criminal history.

The prosecution argued that a life was lost during the commission of a violent crime, adding to the reasons the defendants should remain detained.

Kovler argued that Mack should be released from detention, citing there was no DNA that linked Mack to the case. He stated there is no evidence of phone pings or other phone data indicating it was a planned attack on Stewart. Kovler also stated that if he was to be released that he has family who would support him as they had showed up to the hearing in person.

Yarbough also asked for Palmers, release based on what he actually does in the evidence shown in the hearing. He claimed that Palmer has no conversation prior that is documented that there was violent criminal intent, the witnesses whose apartment they were in upstairs said he came in to use the bathroom, said hello, and sat down.

He also didn’t attempt to cover his face like the other suspect in the video footage evidence did, so he wasn’t trying to hide his identity, Yarbough claimed.

The defense also showed that the witness from the incident originally described the older gentleman as being around five foot four inches tall, which is not true for Palmer.

Judge Edelman ruled that Mack would remain detained in the case, but was unsure about Palmer. Judge Edelman asked that there be a hearing for Palmer on Nov. 5 so he could go over the new evidence presented in the hearing and make his own conclusion.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Nov 5.

Carjacking, Robbery Trial Concludes With Disputed Cellphone Evidence

A debate over the whereabouts of a defendant based on cellphone evidence dominated closing arguments in a carjacking and armed robbery trial before DC Superior Court Judge Andrea Hertzfeld on Nov 4.

Defense attorneys Jason Tulley and Marta Garcia focused on cell phone data, family alibis, and investigative efforts to obtain video evidence near the crime scene.

A forensic investigator called by the defense created a map of the carjacking scene using using longitude and latitude coordinates for three nearby cell towers.

The investigator testified that the three towers were located approximately 0.15 miles, 0.1 miles, and 0.25 miles from the site of the carjacking. The defense maintains Tucker’s cell phone activity, pinging off a tower farther from the scene, indicated he was not present when the crime occurred.

The investigator described personally visiting the cell tower sites in late October to take photographs, later marking 11 image locations on a map for the jury. She emphasized that no single tower was more powerful than another.

Under cross-examination, the prosecution questioned the investigator’s credentials and methodology. The witness acknowledged she holds no certifications, and no formal education in telecommunications or frequency analysis. The investigator also stated they took photos of the tower areas but not the towers themselves, as instructed by the defense attorneys.

The witness admitted she kept no written notes or reports for this case. The investigator has testified only for defense attorneys in previous cases.

Another witness, Tucker’s older sister, provided personal testimony about her brother’s life and family. She testified that she saw her brother at their father’s home around midnight on the night of the incident. She stated that Tucker, who lives in the basement of their father’s house, arrived after she did and left the house after she departed. The witness said she did not see her brother’s black Kia when she left and noted he was not wearing his coat that night.

During cross-examination, the prosecution clarified that she had no direct knowledge of the crime and did not witness it. She confirmed that Tucker is about five feet eight inches tall, thin-built, and light-skinned. She declared that she loves her brother and does not want him punished.

The defense called a second investigator, who detailed his efforts to gather surveillance footage from the night of the crime. The witness testified that he began working on Tucker’s case in early September, nearly five months after the carjacking. He told jurors he was largely unsuccessful in obtaining footage from nearby locations for technical reasons.

The investigator also examined the alley where the victim identified Tucker, taking measurements to determine the approximate distance between them during the identification—about 50 feet away, according to his findings. The witness noted that several identifiable features, such as a fence and trash cans, were visible in the body-worn police video used for his analysis.

On cross-examination, the prosecution questioned the investigator’s background who confirmed that they operate independently, have only worked for defense attorneys, and are being compensated for his work on the case. They also admitted they had no firsthand knowledge of the victim’s identification conditions or lighting at the scene.

The defense entered a stipulation regarding the interpretation of DNA testing. A prosecutorial forensic scientist analyzed multiple swabs from Tucker’s car, including the steering wheel, rearview mirror, drink container, and latex gloves. However, none produced conclusive results linking Tucker to the DNA evidence collected from the car.

In closing arguments, the prosecution laid out their case in three parts, highlighting the expert and eyewitness testimony as well as the physical evidence of Tucker’s being involved in the carjacking and robbery.

The most compelling evidence, they stated, was the fact that bank cards and IDs belonging to the victim were allegedly found on Tucker at the time of his arrest.

The prosecution also stated that, although there were some inconsistencies in the description of the assailant, the victim described a nearly complete picture of Tucker to a detective with the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). This description was confirmed by a show-up identification during the arrest.

The prosecution also highlighted its cell-site data that came to light during the testimony of the FBI Special Agent who compiled the information. They stated that the data showed the cellphone that was recovered from Tucker was in the general area of the incident minutes before it occurred.

The defense, led by Tulley cast doubt on the testimony of the victim by stating that he had been arrested earlier in the day for having an open container of alcohol and that police can be seen in body worn camera footage stating he is drunk.

Tulley also pointed out that descriptions of the assailants’ clothes, the number and description of firearms, and the direction the suspects drove off changed throughout interviews with police and investigators.

The defense brought up the fact that the victim has two pending cases, one in DC and one in Maryland, for felony strangulation and driving under the influence, respectively. Tulley stated that this is enough bias to cast doubt on whether he is testifying of his own free will or to gain favor with the prosecutor’s office.

Tulley stated that “show up”identification procedures were not handled properly by the police and that Tucker was identified in handcuffs, which was prejudicial in nature. They also emphasized the lack of DNA evidence and the fact that a gun was never identified as having been used by Tucker during the incident.

Tulley concluded by casting doubt on the cell-site data, stating that it was compiled in a rushed manner and did not include information that could have proven Tucker was in another neighborhood at the time of the crime.

He also stated that security footage from the area was lost when police failed to collect it at the time of Tucker’s arrest. Furthermore, he posed a question about why witnesses from the carjacking were not interviewed, specifically a cousin of the victim who was present at the scene?

The prosecution’s rebuttal reemphasized the fact that the cell-site data was compiled by an expert and that there is no evidence that Tucker was anywhere other than at the scene of the crime when it occurred.

They also stated that three separate officers testified to the victim not being drunk when he spoke to them and identified Tucker later in the night.

The parties will reconvene when the jury has reached a verdict.

Stabbing Defendant Declared Mentally Competent After Malingering

A stabbing defendant was declared mentally competent to stand trial before DC Superior Court Judge Deborah Israel after a behavioral expert said he was malingering on Oct. 30.

Chauncey Liverpool, 32, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal stabbing on the 4300 block of 3rd Street, SE, on Sept. 9. One individual was wounded.

At the hearing, Judge Israel informed parties a doctor from Saint Elizabeths Hospital for psychiatric patients found Liverpool competent to stand trial but said he was initially malingering-feigning illness to avoid punishment. In September, Liverpool refused to take part in a psychiatric evaluation. That’s when a full competency evaluation was ordered. The new report declared that Liverpool does not need the level of mental health treatment provided by the hospital.

In order to stand trial, a defendant must understand the charges against him and be able to help his lawyer defend the case.

Liverpool’s lawyer, Howard McEachern, did not object. However, he noted that Liverpool says he is not getting all the medical care he needs at the DC Jail, though his exact conditions weren’t specified.

Judge Israel ordered a medical alert be sent to the jail on Liverpool’s behalf. Meanwhile, he waived his right to a preliminary hearing and remains jailed.

The next hearing in the case is set for Nov. 12.

Co-Defendants Injured in Shooting Plead Not Guilty at Arraignment

Two co-defendants who face charges for a shooting in which they sustained injuries pleaded not guilty during an arraignment before DC Superior Court Judge Jennifer Di Toro on Nov. 7.

Reco Jackson, 27, and Raquan Felder, 33, are charged with assault with intent to kill while armed, two counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, and three counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence. Additionally, Jackson is charged with unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction greater than a year and Felder is charged with carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business.

The counts stem from their alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting on Jan. 25 on the 4400 block of 19th Place, NE. Jackson sustained a gunshot wound to his left arm and Felder sustained a gunshot wound to his left foot.

According to court documents, a witness told the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) that Jackson and another individual exchanged an unidentified object for money. During the encounter, Jackson reportedly became agitated, pulled out a gun, and the other individual did as well. Shots were fired as Jackson and Felder reportedly fled the scene in a vehicle.

At the hearing, the court arraigned the defendants on the charges against them. Jackson’s attorney, Kavya Naini, and Felder’s attorney, Darryl Daniels, pleaded not guilty on their behalf and asserted their right to a speedy trial.

Following the arraignment, the prosecutor requested Judge Di Toro detain Jackson and Felder at the DC Jail pending their trial. Judge Di Toro released both defendants on Feb. 12 based on their need for treatment of their gunshot wounds. Naini and Daniels opposed the detention of their clients.

Judge Di Toro told parties to present arguments for detention before the case’s calendar judge, DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt, at the next hearing.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on Nov. 25.

Judge Accepts Plea Deal in Playground Shooting Case

DC Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean accepted a plea agreement in a shooting case on Nov. 4, which the suspect committed while on release for a separate incident.

Kamari Childs, 20, was originally charged with three counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, endangerment with a firearm in a public place, unlawful discharge of a firearm, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction of more than one year, and destruction of property less than $1000.

These charges stem from a shooting at a playground on Sept. 15 on the 200 block of N Street, SW. No individuals were reported to be injured during the shooting.

At the hearing, Childs accepted a deal extended by the prosecution that required him to plead guilty to three counts of assault with a dangerous weapon and one count of unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction of more than one year. In exchange, all other charges will be dismissed and prosecution will not seek an indictment.

The assault with a dangerous weapon charge can carry a maximum sentence of up to ten years imprisonment in DC and the unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction of more than one year charge carries a mandatory minimum imprisonment of one year and a maximum of ten years.

In addition, Childs will also waive his right to independent DNA testing and register as a gun offender in DC for two years after he’s released.

According to the prosecution, the plea deal reflects the seriousness of the case and notes the incident occurred while Childs was still on probation from another firearm case he was sentenced to earlier in the same month.

Childs had to register as a gun offender in DC as a condition of his probation for the previous case, and his possession of another firearm violated his probation.

He subsequently had his probation in the previous case revoked. His plea only relates to this case, the probation revocation in the previous case will trail this case’s sentencing.

Childs’ defense lawyer Wole Falodun asked for a Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA) study for the defendant before sentencing went forward, which was granted. The YRA allows a defendant’s conviction to be sealed if they successfully complete all sentencing requirements. It is up to the judge’s discretion to sentence a defendant under the YRA.

The court also ordered a Pre-Sentence Investigation (PSI) prior to sentencing to consider the defendant’s past, probation violation, and details of the second firearm case.

Falodun also motioned for the release of the defendant, which was quickly denied by Judge McLean, citing it had been eight days after his release that he committed this shooting. The defendant remains confined.

Parties are set to reconvene Jan. 30 for sentencing.

Prosecutors Argue Shooting Defendant Was ‘Driven By The Desire of Revenge’

DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt heard closing arguments on Nov. 3 and 4, in a jury trial involving a shooting that killed a 13-year-old boy.

Reginald Steele, 26, is charged with first-degree murder while armed, conspiracy, ten counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, 11 counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, four counts of carrying a pistol without a license, two counts of tampering with physical evidence, and five counts of possession of an unregistered firearm.

The charges are in connection to his alleged involvement in four shootings, including the fatal shooting of 13-year-old Malachi Lukes, at the 600 block of S Street NW, on March 1, 2020. Another individual sustained injuries during the incident.

Steele was also allegedly involved in a non-fatal shooting on March 1, 2020 at the unit block of Channing Street, NE, and a non-fatal shooting on Feb. 22, 2020 at the 700 block of Farragut Street, NW, where no individuals sustained injuries.

Prosecutors began their closing arguments with a rap song written by Steele. In the song, Steele referred to himself by his nickname, “Gordo.”

The song contained the lyrics, “I lost my dawg, I’m s****** on all these n***** without a stall, long live Slatt, I wish I hadn’t got that call.”

The prosecution played this song to highlight what they described as a case fueled by “revenge, retaliation, and retribution.” They stated that Steele was “driven by the desire of revenge” for the murder of his friend, Tahlil Byrd, 19. Byrd, a rapper who was publicly known as the “North West Goon” and by his friends as “Slatt,” was fatally shot on Sept. 19, 2019 on the 600 block of S Street, NW.

After Byrd’s death, there were rivalries between the 9th Street neighborhood and the 3500 crews, which started over a rap beef and specifically, who warranted the title as “the real North West Goon,” the prosecution explained.

Steele and his co-defendants, Aaron Brown, 29, Tyiion Freeman, 26, and Koran Jackson, 25, who were also friends of Byrd and close to his family, started targeting members of the 9th Street neighborhood, according to the prosecution. Brown, Freeman and Jackson were previously convicted for their involvement.

“We had to bring you these other individuals to establish his [Steele’s] guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,” the prosecution explained.

“All four individuals were fueled by revenge,” the prosecution added.

The prosecution argued that on March 1, 2020, Steele and Jackson drove a stolen Kia Soul from the 1800 block of Bruce Place, SE, stopped at a BP gas station, proceeded to pick up Freeman and Brown, then drove to their first targets.

“They opened fire on four teenagers,” said the prosecution. “They killed Malachi Lukes with all his hopes, dreams, and tomorrows.”

The driver in a vehicle behind the Kia Soul, who witnessed the shooting on S Street and dialed 9-1-1, described the shooting as “something out of a movie.”

“The passenger in the backseat had his right hand turned sideways to shoot,” the caller added. The caller also provided a description of the vehicle, and mentioned that it had a Maryland license plate.

Surveillance footage showed Lukes and his friends as they went into a uBreakiFix store and picked up a basketball, then exited the store. Moments later, Lukes was shown lying on the ground, suffering from a single gunshot wound.

“They targeted, they preyed on those young kids,” the prosecution emphasized. The reason that they targeted Lukes and his friends was because they participated in a music video from a 9th Street rapper, according to the prosecution.

Additionally, one of Lukes’ friends testified to having been involved in a text exchange with Byrd’s cousin, who confronted Lukes’ friend about a post he made, which Byrd’s cousin interpreted as an insult to Byrd himself.

Immediately after the shooting on S Street, Steele and his co-defendants drove to Channing Street to target another member of 9th Street, claimed the prosecution.

“They didn’t even want to stop after killing a 13-year-old,” the prosecution stated.

The victim on Channing Street saw the Kia Soul as it approached. He testified that a passenger from the backseat had his right hand turned sideways as he shot at him. The victim also testified that the passenger yelled at him, “I hope your b**** a** dies.” The victim was able to escape as he hid behind parked vehicles.

After the shootings, surveillance footage showed who the prosecution claimed is Steele and his co-defendants as they traveled on the 500 block of Lamont Street, NW, where the Kia Soul was seen abandoned with a flat tire, according to a resident who lived in the neighborhood.

The abandoned vehicle also had a Maryland license plate, as the 9-1-1 caller described from the S Street shooting.

The prosecution was allegedly able to identify Steele among the group of individuals by the outfit he was wearing. The outfit, a dark blue hoodie and dark grey jeans, was seen on an Instagram story the day before the shooting. The story contained a picture of Steele and Jackson together.

Additionally, the footage from the BP gas station that Steele and Jackson allegedly stopped at on March 1 showed the two individuals as they went into the gas station store, with Steele seen wearing the same outfit and Jackson wearing a NASA sweatshirt, which was allegedly recovered during a search warrant on May 29, 2020.

The prosecution also described the shooting that took place on Feb. 22, 2020.

The victim, who lived on the 700 block of Farragut Street, NW, described the shooters having also been driving a Kia Soul. The victim’s girlfriend testified that, “as soon as I came out on my porch I noticed two girls and two boys staring at us from inside the car.”

The victim’s girlfriend further explained that a man in the rear driver seat rolled down his window and asked the victim, “What you say?”

“She testified to how angry the person in the backseat was to the point that one of the girls in the car told him to calm down,” the prosecution explained.

The man, who was wearing a lime green hoodie, proceeded to get out of the car and walk into the middle of the street, along with another man who was sitting in the driver seat.

The individuals fired eleven gunshots at the victims as they ran into their home.

The prosecution argued that the shooters were Steele and Jackson, as Steele was seen wearing the same lime green hoodie in a picture with Jackson, also posted on Instagram.

“They exited the Kia and moved closer to their targets,” the prosecution stated. “It was the defendant who was irate and enraged, who just couldn’t let it go,” the prosecution continued.

The prosecution also mentioned how the firearm, a Glock-19, used in the Feb. 22, 2020 shooting was “consistent with” the same firearm used in the shootings on March 1, 2020, according to a witness who testified on ballistic evidence. The prosecution stated, “perhaps he [the witness] can tell you that.”

Defense attorney Megan Allburn later asked, “Are we convicting people of first-degree murder based on ‘perhaps’?”

Allburn, in her closing argument, stated, “you have heard a lot of information about other people, but I will only talk about Reginald Steele.”

Allburn argued, “no identifying witness came in and said Mr. Steele was one of the shooters” on Feb. 22 or March 1, 2020. She explained that when Lukes’ friend testified in court, he did not testify that he saw the shooters on S Street.

She also argued that there was no evidence of Steele’s having uncontrollable rage in the backseat of the Kia Soul on Farragut Street.

In response to the prosecution’s “revenge, retaliation, and retribution” argument, Allburn asked, “where did that come out from the witnesses on this stand?”

When talking about Steele’s grievance over Byrd’s death, Allburn emphasized, “a young person died and it’s unreasonable for someone to mourn the death of their friend?”

“It’s not a crime to mourn your friend,” she added.

Allburn also argued that there is no video of Steele and his co-defendants exiting the Kia Soul after they abandoned it, despite the surveillance footage that showed the individuals on Lamont Street.

Additionally, she argued that the resident on Lamont Street, who testified, said that there were three or four individuals, and that the prosecution did not refresh his memory to clarify the exact number of individuals he saw walking.

During rebuttal, the prosecution asked, “were we not in the same court room for the last two damn months?”

They added, “Ms. Allburn doesn’t like the evidence because it convicts her client.”

The prosecution argued, “she [Allburn] had the chance to cross-examine the witness and asked how many individuals he saw, but she didn’t.”

Allburn requested a motion for a mistrial, arguing that the prosecution’s statement was inappropriate and ‘burden shifting’- a legal concept that changes who is responsible for proving or disproving a key fact in a case.

Judge Brandt denied Allburn’s request for a mistrial, arguing that the prosecution’s statement was not burden shifting because “it’s a correct statement.” The defense had the chance to ask the witness those questions and did not,” Judge Brandt stated.

In regards to DNA evidence, an expert previously testified that Steele’s likely DNA was found on the door handle of the Kia Soul on March 1, 2020, the prosecution stated.

Allburn rebutted, “DNA on the door handle does not say he [Steele] was in the car during the shooting.” She explained that the DNA expert also testified that ‘DNA does not tell time,’ and that when a person touches something, their DNA is permanently on it.

Allburn emphasized, “there is no credible evidence showing Mr. Steele assisted anyone in the shooting on March, 1, 2020. There is no credible evidence showing Mr. Steele entered into a conspiracy on March 1, 2020.”

However, the prosecution rebutted, “there is no doubt that on March 1, 2020, there was an agreement to kill members of 9th Street.”

Parties are slated to reconvene when the jury reaches a verdict.

Stabbing Defendant Takes Plea, Receives Suspended Sentence in Phone Squabble

DC Superior Court Andrea Hertzfeld accepted a stabbing defendant’s plea deal and imposed a suspended sentence on Nov. 4.

Miyanna Parker, 31, was originally charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for her involvement in the stabbing of her partner on the 4500 block of 3rd Street, SE, on Oct. 9.

The assault allegedly occurred while Parker and the victim were at their apartment together. Parker allegedly became irate due to the victim’s being on their phone and attacked the victim. The encounter escalated as Parker allegedly grabbed a knife from the kitchen and stabbed the victim right before they retreated to the bathroom. Both the victim and defendant sustained cuts.

Defense attorney David Akulian alerted the court of Parker’s intent to accept the prosecution’s plea deal, which required her to plead guilty to simple assault in exchange for the prosecution not seeking an indictment.

Akulian clarified that by pleading guilty Parker was not declining the notion that her wound was indicative of self-defense.

The conditions of Parker’s sentence include 180 days in jail, suspended. She will be required to serve one year of probation. Parker will have to pay a $100 fee to the Victim of Violent Crime Fund. Judge Hertzfeld ordered that she engage in a domestic violence intervention program affiliated with her one year of probation.

The stay away order imposed on Parker was dropped. Parker’s partner wants Parker to be involved in their children’s lives and wants Parker to be physically present.

The parties are not slated to reconvene.

Witnesses’ Shooting Recollections Change from Previous Testimony

Two eyewitnesses who appeared before DC Superior Court Judge Danya Dayson on Nov. 6 were challenged repeatedly during their testimonies regarding the events leading up to a fatal shooting.

David Pena, 48, is charged with second-degree murder while armed, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence or dangerous offense, assault with a dangerous weapon, and unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction, for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of Maurice Robinson, 24. The incident occurred on June 12, 2023, on the 3000 block of 30th Street, SE.

The defendant’s daughter took the stand and explained her side of the story about the fight that occurred before the shooting. She explained that the mother of her best friend had been goading her over texting in the hours before the fight, complaining about the girls verbally fighting and making rude commentary about the witness’ infant son.

As a new mother at the time, the witness grew defensive in the light of the comments, which included an accusation that the infant had Down syndrome. The witness denied that when asked by the prosecution.

The contents of the text messages required the use of the grand jury transcript, as the witness said she could no longer remember exactly what most of the messages said.

After the text messages became intense, the witness testified, she blocked her friend’s mother. Shortly after, a group of people gathered outside of the witness’ home and called for her to come outside and fight.

The witness went outside with the intention of fighting and settling whatever it was between herself and her friend, and then moving on. She later said that she wished she hadn’t.

The fight itself was brief, the witness said. It started on the sidewalk outside of the witness’ house, until she fell and was dragged into the street. Mace was sprayed into her eyes when she fell and she could not see who was attacking her.

The witness’ stepfather got on top of the witness to cover her from the assault from the group of people. At the beginning of the fight, she had heard him say “Nobody jumping in” as he got out of his car.

At one point while she was on the ground, she was aware of a man trying to stomp on her head and her erstwhile friend pulling her hair, but her stepfather was able to intercept the kicks.

She heard a gunshot, which stopped the fight. She was quick to get herself and her sisters into the house and tried to get the Mace out of her eyes.

Under cross examination, she clarified that she had not personally seen the shooting and did not know who had been shot or who had shot. She had initially assumed that the people who had come with her friend’s family had shot until she learned later that Robinson had been shot through Instagram.

Defense attorney Dana Page asked the witness about a prior incident involving Robinson, where she had gotten into a physical fight with one of his family members, had been Maced by his mother, and Robinson had chased her. A dark object had been visible in his waistband, and the witness explained she believed it was a gun.

The prosecution asked further questions and the witness explained that it was dark when that incident had occurred, sometime in the fall of 2020. She had not called the police for this incident.

However, she was questioned multiple times about the accuracy of her statements. Using the transcript of her grand jury testimony and her interview with police, the prosecution had to remind her of statements previously made under oath when she did not accurately recall them while testifying.

In court, the witness had claimed she did not know of any disagreements between herself and her friend. However, in the grand jury, she testified that there had been a disagreement regarding a message the friend had received from the father of the witness’ baby. The message had been sent in April, but the witness had only found out about it in June, and her friend had not been willing to explain what was in the message.

The transcript of her interview with detectives gave a clearer insight to the nature of her relationship with her biological father, Pena. She testified in court that they were “tight” and had become closer than they were. In her interview with police, she had said that she was closer to her stepfather than she was to Pena, and that “my real dad is only my father.” When police asked what she knew specifically about her biological father, she had answered, “to be honest with you, nothing.”

The mother of the previous witness and Pena’s ex-wife testified as an eyewitness to the fight. She had been sitting in the car with her husband, who is her daughter’s stepfather, when the fight began. She saw Pena’s other children come out of the house and also saw her daughter come out, but she does not remember if her daughter came out before or after the other children.

She was challenged with her grand jury transcript, where she had stated that her daughter came out first, followed by her four siblings: two of them the witness’ daughter with Pena, and the other two were Pena’s children with another woman.

The witness stated that she saw part of the fight from the passenger window of the car. It started on the sidewalk and moved into the street. She lost sight of the fight as it moved to the driver’s side of the car. She also testified that at one point she put her head down in fear and did not see a portion of the fight for this reason.

Her husband got out of the car to cover her daughter while the group of people was kicking her in the street. Toward the end of the fight, the witness said she heard yelling and raised voices, but “that’s about it.” She did not mention a gunshot, though the prosecution will continue with this line of questioning when the trial continues.

The mother’s recollection of the fight differed slightly from her daughter’s. While the daughter was very clear she had heard her stepfather say “Nobody jumping in” during the fight, the mother recalls her daughter saying “I don’t want nobody jumping me” and that her stepfather did not say anything.

Similarly to her daughter, the witness was contradicted a number of times. Her testimony changed regarding who she saw in the windows of one of the apartments in their building, as she had originally testified she saw two of Pena’s daughters and now believed she had seen one of the sons, whose name she could not recall.

Parties are slated to reconvene Nov. 10.

Shooting Defendant Accepts Plea Deal

A shooting defendant accepted a plea deal before DC Superior Court Judge Judith Pipe on Nov. 3.

Thurman Williams, 55, was originally charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence and unlawful possession of a firearm by a convict for his involvement in a shooting that took place at the 1100 block of New Jersey Avenue, NW on Oct. 17. No injuries were reported.

Williams accepted a deal, which required him to plead guilty to attempted assault with a dangerous weapon and unlawful possession of a firearm. In exchange, the prosecution agreed to dismiss all other charges and not seek an indictment.

The prosecution argued that, if the case went to trial, they could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Williams fired a silver gun near the victim unprovoked and knowingly, and that he was aware he was not allowed to own a gun due to a prior conviction.

Camille Wagner, Williams’ defense attorney, pushed for Williams’ release. She argued he needed to “get some affairs in order” between the Nov. 3 hearing and sentencing. She specifically pointed to Williams’ elderly mother, whom he had been financially supporting for a few years and a business he started that he would need to dismantle.

Judge Pipe denied the request for release. While she acknowledged that Williams’ prior conviction was manslaughter as opposed to murder, she argued Williams still knew he was not allowed to possess the firearm, and that he still fired it near someone.

Williams is held until sentencing.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Jan. 9.

Search