On Jan. 4, the second day of a bench trial before DC Superior Court Judge Marisa Demeo, the lead detective in the case, a firearms expert and a DNA analyst presented evidence prosecutors say links Matthew Walker, 25, to the murder of David Remen, 32.
Walker is charged with first-degree murder while armed along with seven other counts including assault with intent to kill and possessing a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged connection to an incident on the 1700 block of Hamlin Street, NE, on Feb. 14, 2019.
Walker is also charged with second-degree murder while armed for allegedly stabbing 23-year-old Jamal Green-Lee to death on the 100 block of Michigan Avenue, NE on April 29, 2019. Green-Lee died on Nov. 4, 2020, due to his injuries.
The detective, a 20 year veteran of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), arrived at the scene about an hour after the shooting. As part of his investigation, the officer reviewed surveillance footage from different angles which captured the shooting at a business that places low-skilled workers.
The silent video initially shows a person standing in a doorway who appears to be Remen. Then a suspect dressed in black and wearing a hoodie enters the frame and starts shooting. The area is filled with smoke and Remen disappears from the screen.
In another sequence, the detective describes footage from outside surveillance cameras nearby showing the suspect fleeing the scene and dropping items of clothing into a trash can and recycle bin.
The detective was then able to recover a black hoodie with red and white stripes as well as a pair of sweatpants and a black mask.
Of particular value, said the officer, was a slip of paper with Matthew Walker’s phone number found in the jacket. Two days later acting on a tip, police found a Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol and a magazine not far from the murder scene. As a local, Walker was known to hang out in the neighborhood and became a target of the investigation.
In cross examination, Walker’s defense lawyer Stephen Logerfo asked the detective if he’d interviewed disgruntled employers at the firm.
“We scraped the bottom of the bowl,” said the detective but he had to follow the evidence. Logerfo pressed the detective on the physical description of the suspect.
He said the eyewitness descriptions were “all over the map.” Logerfo pointed out one witness identified the handgun as a MAC 10, not the recovered Glock 19.
In re-direct, the prosecution asked the detective if the suspect’s gun looked like a MAC 10. He responded it did not.
The prosecution also called a firearms expert to compare bullet casings and fragments collected at the crime scene to see if they were a match for the recovered firearm.
The expert explained that when a bullet is fired it acquires distinctive “tool marks” like ridges and grooves as it travels through the barrel. Under microscopic examination it’s possible to see the changes and make comparisons.
After a test firing of the suspect’s Glock 19, the expert said there was “sufficient agreement” the conclusion that the casings at the crime scene were likely fired from the Glock.
Under cross examination from Logerfo, the expert admitted he couldn’t say with certainty the bullets came from the same gun and that his analysis was not built on an established statistical model.
The final prosecution witness, a DNA analyst, explained how she tested the articles of clothing and the weapon to see if there was specific genetic residue linking Walker to the evidence.
The analyst was able to retrieve bits of DNA from the waistband of the jumpsuit pants as well as material from the sweatband of the hoodie and a discarded glove. For the firearm, the analyst needed to gather additional samples from the DC Department of Forensic Sciences (DFS).
To make the comparison, the analyst used a mixture profile of DNA including those at the crime scene to see if Walker’s DNA was more likely to match the evidence than the other samples.
By exponentially large numbers–in the range of quadrillions and septillions–the analyst said, the samples were “more likely” to come from Walker than the comparators.
However, Logerfo pointed out that in terms of the glove and the firearm there was less compelling evidence of Walker’s DNA.
The prosecution intends to present one more witness. Still to be determined is whether Walker will take the stand in his own defense. No motive has been established for the crime.
The trial continues on Jan. 5.
