Opinion ID: 2654917
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Columbia Road Shootings

Text: The government‟s theory at trial was that Jenkins killed Evans to prevent him from testifying about a previous shooting committed by Jenkins‟s cousin, appellant Israel. That incident took place on Columbia Road near 13th Street, Northwest, on the evening of December 9, 2005. The victims were a group of young men known as the “1-7 boys” (so-called because they came from the neighborhood around 17th Street, N.W.) who were “hang[ing] out” there at the time. One of the survivors, Cortez Blount, testified that Charlie Evans, whom he knew by the nicknames “Charlie Brown” and “Lamb Chop,” arrived and “had words” with one of the group members. Two men, one with a tightly tied hoodie and one with a ski mask, arrived shortly afterward. Evans stepped away. Some pushing ensued and the man in the hoodie, whom Blount could not identify, started shooting at the 1-7 boys who had been talking with Evans. He killed two of them and wounded three, including Blount. Two months later, in February 2006, Detective Mitch Credle of the Metropolitan Police Department told Israel that he was the primary suspect in the shootings. 6 At appellants‟ trial, a government witness named George Haynes testified that Israel, in a conversation with him, had admitted having perpetrated the shootings on Columbia Road. As further proof of that fact, the government introduced evidence that Israel committed another murder a week earlier at a store on Chapin Street near 14th Street, N.W., with the same gun that was used in the Columbia Road shooting.2 Israel‟s cousin Jeremy Johnson, whose presence during the Chapin Street shooting was confirmed by the store‟s surveillance tape, had testified before the grand jury that Israel was the shooter.3 The trial court ruled the evidence of the uncharged Chapin Street murder admissible “on the issue of whether the shooter in the first case was the same shooter in the second case.” 2 A government firearms expert testified that cartridge casings recovered from the scenes of the Chapin Street and Columbia Road shootings had been expelled by the same gun. 3 Johnson recanted this testimony at trial, claiming he was drunk and high when he gave it. Opining that Johnson looked “scared to death,” the trial judge admonished the prosecution to let him know protection was available. Because Johnson took the stand at trial and was subject to cross-examination, his grand jury testimony was admissible against Israel. See D.C. Code § 14-102 (b)(1) (“A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement and the statement is inconsistent with the declarant‟s testimony, and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition.”). 7