Charles Village Court Watch

James Cureton is charged with the first degree murder of Tanise Ervin, the first degree attempted murder of Rashad Jenkins and Darnell Barksdale, the use of a handgun in a violent felony and lesser charges.  The crimes are alleged to have occurred on March 12, 2011 in the 1100 block of Gorsuch Avenue in Better Waverly.

Yesterday was the second day of jury deliberation, and today was the final day.

Yesterday, the jury requested to see the video of the testimony of Rashad Jenkins, and it was played for them.  I should note here that every time there is a note from the jury, the defendant has to be brought to the courtroom and unshackled, and the attorneys have to return to the courtroom.

In the afternoon, the jury sent a note to Judge Fletcher-Hill stating that it was unable to reach a unanimous verdict.  Judge Fletcher-Hill spoke to the jury briefly about deliberating and sent them back to deliberate further.

Shortly after that, there was another note from the jury.  A juror was feeling ill and could not continue that afternoon.  The case would resume this morning at 9:30.

When I arrived this morning after having attended the Board of Estimates meeting, I learned that the jury had asked how to weigh Rashad Jenkins' testimony on the witness stand versus his taped interview with Detective Brummer.  As you may recall, there are big differences in what appears in the two instances.  The jury had been instructed that as with any other evidence, it is up to the jury to decide how much weight to give each piece of evidence.

A bit after 11, the judge announced that he had another note from the jury.  He noted that unfortunately, the jury had given the vote at that time (8 not guilty and 4 guilty), and the jury had stated that it was hopelessly deadlocked.  The jury was brought in and was given a modified Allen charge (also called the dynamite charge).  Here is a link to the history and text of the Allen charge (and I cannot tell you exactly what were the modifications):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_v._United_States_%281896%29

Just before lunch, the jury asked for the dates of the jail calls.  Following this note, there was another note: "Lunch now."  The jury was sent to get paid and to get lunch while the court made a list by CD track number of the dates of the eight jail calls that were in evidence.  Defense attorney Jack Rubin objected to providing the information to the jury, but the judge ruled that when the tapes had been played, the jury had not been aware that it would not have the transcripts of the calls in which the dates and times were included.

At 4, another note from the jury was read.  It stated that the jury was still hopelessly deadlocked, but now it gave the vote as 5 not guilty and 7 guilty.

The judge called in the jury, and he asked for a show of hands of any who thought that there was a chance of reaching a verdict.  No hands appeared,  He was apparently beginning to declare a mistrial when the foreperson of the jury raised her hand.  She was called to the bench, and the judge announced that some jurors wanted to see the video of the testimony by Darnell Barksdale.

After a short break, that testimony was played.  That  took an hour until 5:51.

After two jurors left to move their cars (some garages close at 6) and then came back, there was further deliberation.  Then, at 6:55, there was another note from the jury stating that they were at an impasse.  Finally, Judge Fletcher-Hill declared a mistrial.

Tomorrow at 2 in the same courtroom, the retrial will be scheduled.  This is possible because Judge Fletcher-Hill's court will be the part 45 reception court for the next week and a half.  I will get the date of the retrial from the online court file.

Some comments:  Assistant State's Attorneys Larai Everett and Richard Gibson, Defense Attorney Jack Rubin and Judge Lawrence Fletcher-Hill did an excellent job with a very difficult case.

The state's case had two key parts.  First was the testimony of Rashad Jenkins as contradicted by his taped interview conducted by Detective Brummer.  In court, Jenkins said that the person who had shot him was not in the courtroom, but in the taped interview, he had said that the shooter had been 2G / BG, and he had written that on the photo array.  That was the only evidence identifying the defendant as the shooter.

The other key piece was the jail calls.  Here, one could see the defendant trying to get his girlfriend Ms. Cunningham to get a story straight with him.  This included his telling her not to mention a vanilla smell (gun shot residue).  Also, in some jail calls, the defendant had identified himself as 2G or BG.

There had also been an effort by the defendant and his girlfriend to establish an alibi, but the time line simply did not work.

Thus, we have Jenkins having identified the defendant and then having denied it in court.  And we have jail calls that show what is often called a consciousness of guilt.

The question for the jury then was whether this is enough to sent someone to prison very possibly for life.  While I have said that I lean toward a verdict of guilty, for me it is a very close call.  Obviously, the jurors also wrestled with this.

The state had asked to present some evidence about a gang connection, but based on what was presented in pretrial motions, there simply was not enough there to make the connection to this shooting.  It appeared to me that Judge Fletcher-Hill was following Maryland case law in excluding that evidence.  Such evidence, absent more of a connection to the shooting, can be viewed as prejudicial.  Also, I simply do not see how it would have changed the conundrum for the jury about whether it had enough evidence to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Cureton was the shooter.  While I have not spoken to any jurors, that would appear to me to be why the jury could not reach a verdict.

One thing we seem to see in this case is the unfortunate "stop snitching" mentality in parts of Baltimore City.  It is hard to believe that there was nobody besides Rashad Jenkins who could identify the shooter, and it is clear that some time after identifying the shooter two days after the shooting when he was still very angry over the death of close friend Tanise Ervin, he became very afraid that someone would retaliate against him for "snitching."  It can be very scary to see oneself up as a target for retaliation.