Prosecution Urges Jury to ‘Use Their Common Sense’ in Shooting Trial 

By Patrick Hillmeyer - March 11, 2025
Court | Daily Stories | Non-Fatal Shooting |

Prosecutors in a nonfatal shooting trial urged that the jury “use their common sense” when deliberating in front of DC Superior Court Judge Errol Arthur on March 10. 

Dupre Jones, 26, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, second-degree cruelty to children, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction, and unlawful discharge of a firearm for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting on the 4500 block of First Street, SW, on Oct. 11, 2024. A mother and her child were involved but no injuries were reported. 

The prosecution recounted the incident. According to the mother’s testimony, on Oct. 11, 2024, Jones allegedly showed up at her house asking for a place to stay then got drunk and proceeded to aim a gun at her face, in front of her child. 

Minutes later, according to the prosecutors, the magazine fell out of the gun and the mother was able to kick Jones out of the house. Jones allegedly proceeded to fire the gun in the air with the single bullet left in the chamber, before being arrested across the street. 

The prosecution argued that Jones’ actions satisfied the conditions for all five charges. They predicted that the defense may argue that the mother’s testimony was scattered and hard to follow chronologically; however that’s normal in situations where victims of violent crimes have to face their attacker. They stated that despite the nonsequential nature of the testimony, the mother never wavered that Jones put a gun in her face multiple times.

Finally, the prosecution underscored the importance of the physical evidence that corroborates the mother’s testimony such as the shell casing left over from where Jones allegedly shot in the air, a bullet inside her apartment from when the magazine fell out, the location of Jones’ arrest being across the street, the gun allegedly found on Jones, and expert testimony about those shell casings involved in the incident. Lastly, they heavily reiterated that getting drunk is not a defense for violent crimes. 

Jones’ attorney, Adgie O’Bryant, brought up the scattered nature of the mother’s testimony and compared it to that of a ‘shotgun’ blast of information. He stated that she never said that Jones aimed the gun at her, only that he was waving it around. O’Bryant aimed finger guns at the prosecution to emphasize his point. He claimed that “some people are more expressive than others” and that Jones was simply being demonstrative, gesturing with the gun in his hand. 

O’Bryant also argued that due to the nonsequential nature of the mother’s testimony, the jury can’t know for sure when the magazine dropped out of the gun, therefore Jones could have allegedly been gesturing with an empty gun. He also stated that there is a lack of evidence to demonstrate that there was sufficient cruelty to the child, as he did not testify in court.

“Whether he saw a gun for a second or a minute or at all – we don’t know.” He finished by mentioning that the yellow crime scene tape was not applied properly at the scene of the crime. 

The prosecution rebutted the defense’s statements about the cruelty to the child, stating that it does not matter what the child felt in the moment, it matters the grave harm he was put in. They also brought up the definition of a firearm, stating that nothing in the statutes states whether or not the gun is loaded matters to the charges. They ended by saying that a gun is not something you use to emphasize a point, and that the jury should use their common sense within deliberation. 

Parties will reconvene when the jury reaches a verdict.