State v. Jones

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Wed May 12, 2004 8:21 am

A lot of you have requested updates on my murder trial. I have no problem providing updates because felony trials in Delaware are open to the public so I would not be giving up any "confidential" information.

First, let me lay some background on you:

The event
4 people were hanging out on a front porch at a residence in the city of Wilmington drinking. (This home was a little notorious for being the place where one could come to get some marijuana.) As they were hanging out, around 10:45 p.m., 3 guys wearing black hooded sweatshirts come walking down the street. As they pass, one person on the porch (victim-VIC) yells, "Weed Out, Weed Out"...apparently offering to sell some marijuana.

The defendant ("DEF") yells back an insulting remark (I'll omit that here because we're in "the lounge") and the VIC responds similarly. With that DEF comes up on the porch and shoots VIC twice in the chest and once in the head.

As he did this, 2 of the three people on the porch (WIT#1 and WIT#2) manage to get inside the house without being shot, even though DEF shot into the house. A third person on the porch (WIT#3) runs up the street and DEF shoots off a couple of rounds at him.

The other 2 guys with DEF run from the scene. DEF follows them. As they are running another witness (WIT#4) sees the 2 guys get into a pick-up and drive away...and sees DEF standing around and stuffing the gun into his pants.

DEF was charged with: Murder First Degree, Attempted Murder First Degree, Reckless Endangering First Degree (2 counts), Possession of a Firearm During Commission of a Felony (4 counts), and Possession of a Firearm by a Person Prohibited.

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Wed May 12, 2004 8:22 am

DAY ONE - Tuesday, May 11th

Not much happening today. It took all day just to pick the jury.

Texas Hog · Post by **Texas Hog** » Wed May 12, 2004 10:56 am

dot the i's and cross the t's and put this loser behind bars for good

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Wed May 12, 2004 3:16 pm

DAY TWO - WEDNESDAY, MAY 12th

Due to a family emergency of one of the participants (lawyers) in this case, we only had a 3/4 day today. After opening statements by both the State and Defense, here's what happened:

Victim's Mother [my co-counsel's witness]
This was the State's first witness. She basically testified what VIC was doing all day up until the time she put him on the bus to head towards Wilmington. That was the last time she ever saw her youngest child alive.

Paramedic [my witness]
Our next witness was the paramedic who first arrived at the scene. He testified about the nature of the VIC's injuries...and about the blood all around the victim. He stated that the VIC was pronounced dead at the scene. It was kinda graphic, but essential.

First Reporting Police Officer [my witness]
Next was the first officer on the scene. His testimony was really limited to his initial observations (VIC on the porch) along with identifying a few shell casings that were found near the scene. His primary purpose was to testify that he cleared the scene and put out "crime tape" to keep the scene secure.

Chief Investigating Detective [my co-counsel's witness]
Next was the lead detective. He testified how the defendant was labled as a suspect early on. We also got in a lot of exhibits (pictures, maps, etc.). Really basic stuff. He'll be called later on to give us more detailed information.

Crime Scene Video [my co-counsel played this]
We finished off the day by showing the jury the crime scene video with a chalk outline of where the body was. Also evident in the video were the bullet casings and clothing at the scene.

That's basically it in a summarized nutshell. To be continued....

Today's media coverage: http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2004/05/13trialstartsfor2.html

Ironically enough, the newspaper got it wrong. This crime occurred in 2001, not 2002.

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Wed May 12, 2004 4:44 pm

Egad! This is definitely not G-rated.

Are you on the DEF's side or the State? (I'm not familiar with your specialty)

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Wed May 12, 2004 5:00 pm

I'm tryin' to make this PG or, at worst, PG-17. My apologies if this is too much.

I'm on the side of righteousness , honor, integrity, goodness and the American Way. In other words, I am a prosecutor.....NOT a defense attorney.

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Wed May 12, 2004 5:11 pm

That's okay. I just never expected this on thehogs.net. I guess it shows the diversity of this forum.

Okay, Mr. Prosecutor, keep it up! Blessings!

skinsfan1 · Post by **skinsfan1** » Thu May 13, 2004 10:51 am

Way to go JH! We need more great people like yourself to put these scum bags away. Keep up with the details no matter how graphic. It is very interesting to get a insiders view. Once again keep up the good work.

floridaskinsfan · Post by **floridaskinsfan** » Thu May 13, 2004 2:05 pm

The updates are great. Good luck.

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Thu May 13, 2004 6:14 pm

DAY THREE - THURSDAY, MAY 13th

The trial is starting to heat up a little. We had a full day today. Here's what today's activities included:

Medical Examiner [my co-counsel's witness]
One word describes this witness' testimony: "graphic". He testifeid to the victim's multiple gunshot injuries. The path of the bullets through his chest, abdomen and head. The cause of death (blood loss). The state also introduced several pictures of the autopsy and the victim's lifeless body on the table. Because this trial is an open forum, I respectfully suggested to the victim's family that they wait outside of the courtroom during this testimony....because of its graphic nature. Thankfully, they took my advice.

Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms [my co-counsel's witness]
The next witness was a gun expert from ATF. He testified that several of the shell casings found at the scene were fired from the same gun. He also testified that the type of gun that was possibly used in this case was a "Tech 9" semi-automatic 9 mm caliber gun (no gun was ever recovered in this case). The purspose of his testimony was to show the jury there was only one shooter.

Evidence Detection Officer [my co-counsel's witness]
Next witness was a police officer in charge of evidence detection on the date of the crime. This was pretty dry information. Discussion about measurements, where certain casings were found, showing photos of all of the evidence, entering all of the pieces of evidence through her. Took a while....but necessary.

Witness #4 [my witness]
The final witness of the day was one of our first eye-witnesses. This was the guy who saw the two guys get into the pick-up and drive away. He also saw a 3rd guy run from the scene and stuff a gun into his waistband. This witness had a lot of baggage (many felony convictions) and he did not really want to cooperate because he feared for his safety, since he is presently incarcerated in the same prison as the defendant. He did a decent job and, I thought, was relatively trustworthy notwithstanding his felony record. When I asked him if he was able to identify the person who ran from the scene and stuffed the gun in his waistband, there was a long pause....then he (finally) pointed to the defendant and said, "It looks like him." I knew he was 100% sure it was the defendant...but he was scared to give a 100% positive ID. Considering what I thought he was going to say, I was happy with this. We'll have better witnesses coming.

[Defense mistake #1: This witness was given a photo lineup and could not identify the shooter early on in the investigation. Because of this, I certainly didn't ask him any questions about it. The defense absolutely should have...and failed/forgot to do so. Major mistake on their part, in my opinion.]

Before the day concluded, because another of our witnesses is being reluctant to show up, I asked the Court to issue a "material witness warrant" for that witness' arrest. If need be, that witness will be incarcerated (to secure their appearance) this weekend.

We will be resuming on Monday, May 17th...so don't expect any more updates until then.

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Fri May 14, 2004 9:30 am

WOW. I was wondering WHY the ATF guy's testimony was important, and then you answered my question. The legal process is amazing. i applaud you for being able to stomach these situations. Speaking of which, do the details of this (or other cases) ever appear (haunt?) you in dreams? I hope I'm not probing too much. If so, please disregard.

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Fri May 14, 2004 9:53 am

Well if the ATF guy stated merely that 'several of the casings' found out the scene were from the same gun... what were the other casings? That implies that there were other casings doesn't it... what gun were they fired from?

... was there only one shooter? What if there were 2 shooters and they had the same gun 'cause they bought the gun from the same 'source'. Was it determined that those casings found came from that exact semi, or that they could have come from that TYPE of semi?

Oh that's right... nobody knows... no gun was found...

... the forensic ballistics still sound pretty circumstantial to me bro.

:shock:

I'm also curious to know what percentage of people that are COMPELLED to the stand through a material witness order actually tell the truth? I know they're under oath and all that, but surely that means little to some of the miscreants that we are probably talking about here.

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Fri May 14, 2004 4:56 pm

I don't know, I read the story that you linked us to JH, and it appears that the defense is not guilty by reason of imperfect memories? What is that? At least the twinkie defense was imaginative!

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Fri May 14, 2004 5:05 pm

RED(EEMED)SKIN asks:

[D]o the details of this (or other cases) ever appear (haunt?) you in dreams?

I don't mind this question at all. Luckily, I have never lost sleep over any case or dreamed about any case I've had thus far. Don't take this to mean that I am not passionate about these cases, however. I think that I may have become a little desensitized over the years so I am able to look at cases more "professionally" and less "emotionally". I have to say, it some cases [such as this one], it's tough to keep my emotions in check.

BossHog writes:

Well if the ATF guy stated merely that 'several of the casings' found out the scene were from the same gun... what were the other casings?

Sorry if I confused you. All of the casings found at the scene came from the same gun.

[W]as there only one shooter?

Yes. That's what our witnesses say (you'll hear about them later).

[W]as it determined that those casings found came from that exact semi, or that they could have come from that TYPE of semi?

The testimony was that the casings were fired from the exact same gun...not the exact same type of gun.

[W]hat percentage of people that are COMPELLED to the stand through a material witness order actually tell the truth? I know they're under oath and all that, but surely that means little to some of the miscreants that we are probably talking about here.

Luckily, I spoke with that witness today and it appears as though she'll voluntarily be coming in on Monday. We'll have that warrant ready to go, however, if she doesn't.

To answer your questions, many people would certainly be reluctant to get on the stand if they were compelled to do so against their wishes. My goal, however, is really to get them on the stand. Once there, I can make it clear to the jury that they don't want to be there (so the jury understands their answers to my questions.) Hopefully, as in this case, I can then play a videotape of the witness' prior statement that was more forthcoming. In closing, I can then argue why the jury should believe the videotaped statement (which was taken closer to the date of the crime and not compelled) over the in-court statement.

JansenFan writes

I don't know, I read the story that you linked us to JH, and it appears that the defense is not guilty by reason of imperfect memories? What is that? At least the twinkie defense was imaginative!

That might give you a little clue about the strength of the State's case versus the potential defenses. :wink:

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Sat May 15, 2004 10:58 am

Thanks for cleaning all that up brother...

Continued good luck...

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Sat May 15, 2004 1:23 pm

Dang Justice Hog...This is pretty interesting. May God bless you and your team.

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Mon May 17, 2004 11:32 am

Well listen. I beat the law and order:dead on the mopney game, so if you need advice let me know.......just kidding. I wanted to be a lawyer when I was younger until I realized how much work you had to do. If you could just memorize all case law and rely on other people to do everything so all you had to do was go to court I would be there. It takes a person passionate about the legal system to do what you do and I am proud to know ya. By the way, my mother-in-law works for the public defenders office in PG county MD and so I have seen the legal system from that side, so it is kiind of cool to seethe other perspective.

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Mon May 17, 2004 11:33 am

BossHog wrote:Thanks for cleaning all that up brother...

Continued good luck...

Yes. I stand in agreement with Boss. Very thorough. Keep it up!

skinsfaninroanoke · Post by **skinsfaninroanoke** » Mon May 17, 2004 12:13 pm

Our bro has a mind like a steel trap

Being a Law and Order Junkie/Addict, I would have to say bring on the details - more! more!

::grin::

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Mon May 17, 2004 7:42 pm

DAY FOUR - Monday, May 17th

We are getting to our fact witnesses now. That means we’ll likely be going through fewer witnesses per day (because of the more extensive cross-examination by the defense). Here’s how today went:

Witness #2 [my co-counsel's witness]
This witness was one of the people on the porch when the victim exchanged words with the shooter. He testified how he was on the porch when the verbal altercation occurred. He said he then saw the shooter step up to the porch pulling out a TECH-9 looking “uzi type” gun. Once he saw that, he said he ran inside the house and heard 3 shots. He let another female (Witness #1) into the house before the shots and they both tried to hide inside.

This witness was wishy-washy on the stand and would not positively identify the shooter. He kept going on and on how he didn’t really get a good look at the shooter’s face because he was wearing a “hoody” (a hooded sweatshirt) that covered his face. When questioned about the photo line-up that was presented to him about 1 month after the murder, this witness, still being wishy washy, admitted that he pointed out a picture of the defendant...but claimed that he said, “I think it’s him...but I’m not sure.” [It was pretty clear that this witness feared snitching on the defendant.]

Chief Investigating Detective [my co-counsel's witness]
This police officer was re-called to the witness stand to discuss the photographic lineup shown to Witness #2 approximately one month after the murder. According to this police officer, after Witness #2 looked at the photos for a couple of minutes, he pointed to the defendant’s picture and said, “That’s him....that’s the shooter.” This officer testified that Witness #2 was firm and not ambiguous at all when making this identification.

Witness #3 [my witness]
This witness was one of the people on the porch when the victim exchanged words with the shooter. He testified that upon seeing the defendant walk towards the porch, he saw defendant put his hand in his waist as if about to pull out something. This witness stated that he left the porch and walked toward the street. When he looked back, he saw the shooter pull out a big TECH-9 looking gun and point it at the victim. He then attempted to shoot the victim but the gun apparently jammed. The shooter the re-cocked the gun and shot the victim 3 times. As he was doing this, 2 of “the boys” that were walking with the shooter started running from the scene. The shooter then turned his attention to Witness #3 and shot 2-3 times at him, trying to kill him, too. The shooter then fled the scene.

This witness then testified that in August, 2001, he was incarcerated in the same prison as the shooter. He said the shooter and a couple of his friends approached him in prison, knowing that he was a witness to the homicide, and “suggested” he sign an affidavit claiming that the shooter did not, in fact, commit the murder. Fearing for his safety, he signed the affidavit. This affidavit was entered into evidence today. When I asked him to explain the circumstances surrounding his filling out the affidavit, Witness #3 stated that because he was from out-of-state and didn’t know anyone in the prison, he felt his life was threatened if he didn’t sign the affidavit. He admitted that the affidavit was false and that he completed only because the shooter asked him to. When I asked him if he could identify the shooter in Court, this witness pointed to the defendant and, with 100% certainty, said “that’s him right there.”

Because of a scheduling issue with the Judge, our trial will resume on Thursday, May 20th.

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Mon May 17, 2004 8:24 pm

Wow I'm so impressed. I worry about the safety of Witness 3 though. It must be the mom in me. Keep up the updates.

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Tue May 18, 2004 10:58 am

No, Niki, it's not just you. I nearly soiled myself thinking about the situation in which #3 is. This is getting interest.

JH - is #3 still in jail? And, is the defendant being held in jail during his trial?

skinsfaninroanoke · Post by **skinsfaninroanoke** » Tue May 18, 2004 12:27 pm

we have to wait til the 20th? oh man... not cool... you need to let the Judge know that we have a conflict with his conflict

I don't know about anyone else, but trapped in a situation like him where there is no escape and threatened with major injury - I think I might have signed an affidavit...

Keep up the info big guy - love it!

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Tue May 18, 2004 3:18 pm

RED(EEMED)SKIN asks:

JH - is #3 still in jail? And, is the defendant being held in jail during his trial?

Unfortunately, #3 is still incarcerated. He was actually locked up in an out-of-state prison and we had him brought to Delaware to testify. While he's here, he's being kept in a separate jail from the defendant. Once he's done, we're gonna send him back to the other state.

Regarding the defendant, he is absolutely locked up pending the results of this trial. Hopefully, when we're done with him, he won't ever be released.

We'll see.

FYI (just to keepy y'all on the fence until the 20th), we'll have 3 more witnesses to go. Witness #1 (who was on the porch). A "prison snitch" who was cell-mates with the defendant back in the day...with whom the defendant confided in, admitting to the killing. The Chief Investigatin Detective will then probably wrap things up.

I was also informed today by my lead counsel that she wants me to do the closing argument. That'll make me a little nervous, for sure, but I think I'll be up to the challenge. After the defense does their closing argument, she'll bat "clean up" and handle the State's rebuttal closing argument.

(For those of you unfamiliar with the criminal justice system, the State generally gets "2" closing arguments. We go first, followed by the defense...and then we get to go one more time. The reason for this is that the burden of proof is on the State.)

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue May 18, 2004 8:01 pm

As long as you have wittness like #3 there is not excuse for others to be wishy-washy I hope #3 will be ok and I'm glad he told the truth about the affidavit because the defense would have been counting on it they may not want to mention it now

cant wait for the next update