The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Congrats JH on getting the closing argument. I know you will do us proud!

DAY 5, Thursday, May 20th

We're starting to wind down now, I think. Today we called just two witnesses. Here's what happened:

Witness #1 [my co-counsel's witness]

This was the 4th person on the porch. She testified that she was "chillin'" with all of her friends, drinkin' and hanging out on the porch when she saw 3 guys (she said they looked like "stick-up boys") walking down the street. Having some cash in her pocket (from dealing marijuana recently), she was concerned that were coming to rob her. She stated that as they walked by, the victim yelled out "Weed" as if to sell weed. Words were exchanged (I won't repeat them since I'm trying to get a "PG" rating here). 2 of the guys then stood in an ally by the house while the 3rd guy (the shooter) stepped up onto the porch and got in the victim's face. The shooter then pulled out a gun and shot the victim.

This witness said that as she saw the shooter walk onto the porch and pulled out the gun, she ran inside the house and ran up the stairs. As she did this, the shooter shot at her through the window (after killing the victim).

This witness said that she "eyeballed" the shooter as he was walking down the street approaching her house...and as he walked up on the porch. She stated that she got a good look at the shooter's face.

She was shown a photo lineup a month after the shooting and she picked out the defendant. When asked about it today, she said, "I'm 100% sure I picked out the right photo." When asked if she could ID the guy in Court, she pointed right at the defendant and said, "He did it."

The defense attempted to attack her credibility because she gave different identifying characteristics 3 years ago versus what she said today. They may have been minor points but I don't think the jury felt her testimony was damaged one bit.

Prison Snitch [my witness]

This will probably be our final "civilian" witness. He was cell-mates with the defendant back when he was first arrested on this murder. He said that defendant told him he shot someone on a porch in Wilmington with a Tech-9. Defendant told him that he got away in a white pick-up truck. Defendant also told him that he was going to try to get Witness #3 to be a defense witness for him...by "taking care of him". Defendant also told him that this offense was committed with "some of his boys" and his girlfriend.

After giving his original statement, the State offered a plea to this witness to a drug charge resulting in him being sentenced to 3 years in prison. That may not sound like a big "break" to y'all...but he was looking at 15 years in prison.

The defense attorney tried to get this guy to say that he'd say anything to get a "deal" or to reduce his potential sentence. This witness (correctly) stated that no deals were offered to him, in advance, for his testimony. He also said that the reason he came forward was because he felt that if someone murdered one of his own children, he would want others to come forward...and he felt as though he was just doing his part to bring someone to justice for committing murder.

In my opinion, if Witnesses #3 and #1 closed the coffin door on the defendant, I'm kinda hoping that this prison snitch's testimony nailed the coffin door shut.

Trial will continue on Monday, May 24th. On that day, we're probably gonna call the Chief Investigating Detective (to wrap up some loose ends.) The defense will likely start their case (they said it should take 1/2 day.) Hopefully, we can then read all of the jury instructions to the jury and come back on Tuesday morning for Closing Arguments.

The prison snitch could be a carpenter.. he had details not known to many ( the grilfreind and the get away car) makes his story believable

1niksder wrote:The prison snitch could be a carpenter..

With a high pressure nail gun.


Put the defendant away JH!

JansenFan wrote: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.

Well I beat Dead on the Money AND Double or Nothing! Seriously, I love Law and Order... so is JH like Southerlyn in this case? (the ADA)?

JH, I know you said this was not a capital case... my question is... why the hell not? Is it because he didn't plan this out?

Does Delaware have the death penalty? If so, what do they use?

Anyway, sounds like this case is pretty open and shut, if all goes to plan he will die in jail.

Thanks for the updates JH!

Rich,

Law and Order IS an awesome show, what do you think about Dennis Farina as Briscoe's replacement? I think he's a fine actor and an x-police officer, and he's 60 (9 years younger than Jerry Orbach) so he ought to be a fine replacement. I was still kind of hoping for Chris Noth to come back, can you immagine how awesome a Logan/Green team would be?! It would be bad cop/worse cop for every interrogation!

Skinsfan55 asks:

JH, I know you said this was not a capital case... my question is... why the hell not? Is it because he didn't plan this out?

Does Delaware have the death penalty? If so, what do they use?

Let me answer your second question first. Delaware does have capital punishment. In such cases, sentences are carried out by lethal injection.

Moving on to your first question, in order for a murder to be eligible for capital punishment in Delaware, there must be evidence (and the jury must unanimously decide this) of at least one of the following aggravating circumstances:

a) The murder was committed by a person in, or has escaped from, the custody of a law-enforcement officer or place of confinement. [Not applicable here.]

b) The murder was committed for the purpose of avoiding or preventing an arrest or for the purpose of effecting an escape from custody. [Not applicable here.]

c) The murder was committed against any law-enforcement officer, corrections employee or firefighter, which such victim was engaged in the performance of official duties. [Not applicable here.]

d) The murder was committed a judicial officer, a former judicial officer, Attorney General, former Attorney General, Assistant or Deputy Attorney General (ME!) , former Deputy Attorney General, State Detective, Former State Detective, Special Investigator, or former Special Investigator, during, or because of, the exercise of official duty. [Not applicable here.]

e) The murder was committed against a person who was held or otherwise detained as a shield. [Not applicable here.]

f) The murder was committed against a person who was held or detained by the defendant for ransom or reward. [Not applicable here.]

g) The murder was committed against a person who was a witness to a crime and who was killed for the purpose of preventing the witness' appearance or testimony in any grand jury, criminal or civil proceeding involving such crime, or in retaliation for the witness' appearance or testimony in any grand jury, criminal or civil proeceedings involving such crime. [Not applicable here.]

h) The defendant paid or was paid by another person or had agreed to pay or be paid by another person or had conspired to pay or be paid by another person for the killing of the victim. [Not applicable here.]

i) The defendant was previously convicted of another murder or manslaughter or of a felony involving the use of, or threat of, force or violence upon another person. (In this case, defendant was convicted of Assault Second Degree and Robbery Second Degree back in 1998 which, in my opinion, qualifies under this section. The lead prosecutor, however, felt it did not for reasons unbeknownst to me.)

j) The murder was committed while the defendant was engaged in the commission of, or attempt to commit, or flight after committing or attempting to commit any degree of rape, unlawful sexual intercourse, arson, kidnapping, robbery, sodomy or burglary. (There was some evidence that the defendant, in this case, told the victim to "run his pockets" making this a robbery. Because the defendant never took any of the victim's money, however, it was decided that this was too tenuous to pursue.)

k) The defendant's course of conduct resulted in the deaths of 2 or more persons where the deaths are a probable consequence of the defendant's conduct. [Not applicable here.]

l) The murder was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman in that it involved torture, depravity of mind, use of an explosive device or poison or the defendant used such means on the victim prior to murdering the victim. [Not applicable here.]

m) The defendant caused or directed another to commit the murder or committed murder as an agent or employee of another person. [Not applicable here.]

n) The defendant was under a sentence of life imprisonment, whether for natural life or otherwise, at the time of the commission of the murder. [Not applicable here.]

o) The murder was committed for pecuniary gain. [Not applicable here.]

p) The victim was pregnant. [Not applicable here.]

q) The victim was severely handicapped or severely disabled. [Not applicable here.]

r) The victim was 62 years of age or older. [Not applicable here.]

s) The victim was a child 14 years of age or younger, and the murder was committed by an individual who is at least 4 years older than the victim. [Not applicable here.]

t) At the time of the killing, the victim was or had been a nongovernmental informant or had otherwise provided any investigative, law enforcement or police agency with information concerning criminal activity, and the killing was in retaliation for the victim's activities as a nongovernmental informant or in providing information concerning criminal activity to an investigative, law enforcement or police agency. [Not applicable here.]

u) The murder was premeditated and the result of substantial planning. Such planning must be as to the commission of the murder itself and not simply as to the commission or attempted commission of any underlying felony. [Not applicable here.]

v) The murder was committed for the purpose of interfering with the victim's free exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege or immunity protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, or because the victim has exercised or enjoyed said rights, or because of the victim's race, religion, color, disability, national origin or ancestry. [Not applicable here.]

Whew! This language was taken from 11 Del.C. Section 4209(e) for those of you that are law geeks out there.

Holy Cow, thanks for doing the legwork...

Too bad that he isn't going to get blue juiced. Oh well, maybe you can set him up with an "aggressive" cell mate, lol j/k

DAY SIX, Monday, May 24th


Wow! Today was an extremely short day. Our only witness was:

Chief Investigating Detective [my co-counsel's witness]

...was called just to tie up a few lose ends and address some things that were raised by the defense in their cross-examination of other witnesses.

The State then "Rested"


DEFENSE CASE

The defense elected not to call a single witness and "rested" on the evidence already presented.

Where we go from here:

Today at 2:30 p.m., the attorneys will meet with the judge to discuss the jury instructions.

We will start again tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. and give our "closing arguments". I am giving the State's closing argument and my co-counsel is giving the rebuttal closing argument.

After closing arguments, the jury will begin deliberating....probably around noon tomorrow.

JH, I'm kind of confused why this guy decided to take his chances in trial...

I mean, he's not even trying to defend himself, and he was ID'd be a couple people... is he just trying to waste the state's money? Why not just plead guilty?

It's hard to plead guilty to a life sentence, ya know? They can make arguments that the eyewitnesses cannot be trusted. I think it'll be a weak argument...but, at least, it's an argument. Yes, the case seems strong...but I've seen some weird things in my experience! I hope this does not turn out to be one of them.

... knock 'em dead seems like a terrible cliche at the moment, and break a leg is supposedly bad luck, so I'll just wish you the best of luck with your closing argument bro.

DAY SEVEN, Tuesday, May 25th


We all did our "Closing Arguments" today. The jury was then instructed on the law...and began deliberations at 12:33 p.m..

Closing Argument: I did this.

Defense Closing Argument.

State's Rebuttal Closing Argument: My co-counsel did this.

At the beginning of my closing argument, I displayed (via over-head projector) a picture of the victim laying bloody in the porch after being shot. This remained on the wall as I talked. When I got to the point where one of the witnesses picked the defendant out of a photo line up, I displayed the defendant's picture right next to the picture of the victim...and kept it there until I was done.

When I finished, I left the pictures up there....and made the defense attorney take them down.

At 4:45 p.m., the Judge sent the jurors home for the night...and they'll start deliberating again tomorrow at 9:30 a.m.

There will probably be an article in the local newspaper on our closings. If/when it's published, I'll try to post it on this thread tomorrow.

DAY EIGHT, May 26, 2004

The jury returned to the courthouse today at 9:30 a.m. and deliberated until 11:30 a.m.. At 11:30 a.m., the informed the Court that they reached a verdict in this case.

No matter what happens, this is a good result. If no verdict is reached and the jury is "hung", that means a "mistrial" is declared and we'll all have to do this all over again. The fact that they came back with a verdict was a relief in that regard. Whether "guilty" or "not guilty", there is no way anyone (prosecution or defense) wants to try this case again.

Now....I'll tell you all:

I'm either very very upset with this verdict or very very happy.

I hate to do this to you...but you'll all have to wait until tomorrow to learn the verdict.

Tomorrow morning, I'll post an "url" for the news article announcing the verdict.

Well, I've kept you waiting long enough.

THE VERDICT

If you would like to read about the verdict, read this:

http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2004/05/27newcastlemangui.html

I hope everyone found this thread to be interesting. I enjoyed giving you the "play by play".

Great job JH. How long of a sentence are you going after?

"I hate to do this to you...but you'll all have to wait until tomorrow to learn the verdict."

My hunch tells me that you didn't hate doing that at all!

Well good work JH, and I don't think you enjoyed giving us the PbP as much as I liked reading it. I look forward to the next one!

From the article...

"I'm very happy with the verdict," Deputy Attorney General Francis E. Farren said. "I think that a dangerous man was removed from the streets of Delaware."

--- atta boy brother. Well done.

Your first one has to be a big one, so a great big congrats and virtual beer for JH!!!!

skinsfan1 asks:

How long of a sentence are you going after?

The guy is facing a mandatory sentence of two life terms + an additional mandatory 13 years.

I think that extra 13 years is gonna really make him mad!

Awesome job JH! I am glad to see that all went well for you AND the people of Delaware

I'll buy ya a drink at camp for a toast

Great job JH!

Justice Hog wrote:I hope everyone found this thread to be interesting. I enjoyed giving you the "play by play".

Great Job JH in the courthouse (Congrats on a job WELL done)

The play by play was great....rarely can you get insite like that from the News