ChicagoAvenger
10-20-2009, 07:14 AM
Davidson’s attorneys blame killings on ‘gang from Kentucky’
Posted October 20, 2009 at midnight
http://media.knoxnews.com/media/img/photos/2009/10/19/102009carjack2_t160.jpg
Defendant Lemaricus Davidson observes the proceedings on the first day of his capital murder trial Monday.
The defense team for the alleged ringleader in a torture slaying tipped its strategic hand Monday with a startling suggestion — this random attack on a Knox County couple may not have been so random after all.
Lemaricus Davidson’s defense attorney, David Eldridge, alluded to this claim in opening statements, telling jurors they would wind up questioning the state’s version of events “at the beginning” of what long has been viewed as a carjacking gone wrong. He did not elaborate.
But co-counsel Doug Trant later followed up with a question posed to slaying victim Channon Christian’s best friend, Kara Sowards, that offered a bit more clarity.
“Would it surprise you to learn (Christian and boyfriend Christopher Newsom) were seen at the Exxon on Cherry Street (before they were slain)?” Trant asked.
Davidson, 28, is standing trial this week on a slew of charges ranging from kidnapping to rape to murder in the January 2007 slayings of Christian, 21, and Newsom, 23. Prosecutors Leland Price and Takisha Fitzgerald have a mountain of forensic proof, including Davidson’s DNA on Christian’s clothing and body; his fingerprints on the couple’s belongings; and his palm print on a trash bag in which Christian’s body was wrapped and stuffed inside a garbage can in Davidson’s Chipman Street home.
But Eldridge told jurors it wasn’t surprising that Davidson’s prints would be on items in his house because he lived there. He intimated that the “gang from Kentucky” — co-defendants Letalvis Cobbins, who was convicted in August, George Thomas and Vanessa Coleman — killed the couple and left behind “all the evidence conveniently to be found in Mr. Davidson’s home.”
As for the DNA evidence, Eldridge said, “All the DNA is going to show you is that Mr. Davidson had vaginal … intercourse (with Christian). We believe it will show you Mr. Davidson did not cause the injuries (to her vaginal area).”
“You will have real questions about whether Mr. Davidson was even in the Chipman Street house when (Christian) was killed,” Eldridge told jurors.
Trant later quizzed witnesses about the victims’ alleged drug use. He elicited testimony from Newsom’s friend, Josh Anderson, that Anderson and another friend removed marijuana from Newsom’s truck shortly after Newsom went missing. And Trant questioned Sowards about a marijuana pipe in her apartment — she said it wasn’t hers — and a prescription bottle for hydrocodone belonging to another Christian friend found in Christian’s Toyota 4 Runner. Sowards said the friend probably left it there accidentally.
When prosecutors began asking witnesses who lived in the Chipman Street area if they’d ever seen Christian and Newsom in the neighborhood, all said no. But Trant asked one of those witnesses, “You didn’t go there to buy drugs, did you?”
A toxicology report on both Christian and Newsom did not reveal the presence of drugs or alcohol.
The line of questioning upset family and friends of the two victims. During a lunch break, a Newsom relative made a comment as Trant walked by that he later reported to Judge Richard Baumgartner as “derogatory.” The judge was livid.
“I will not tolerate that,” he told the families from the bench. “They are officers of the court. They have been appointed by this court to represent Mr. Davidson. They are doing this job at the direction of the court. This is their obligation. They do this at great sacrifice to themselves and their families.”
The judge ordered the families not to make “public” statements to or about the attorneys in court or out, though it’s not clear how he could legally bar them exercising their free speech rights outside the courtroom.
“You are not in any way to impugn them,” he said. “If you want to go home and talk about them in your living room, have at it. But you are not to do that in this court or on the airwaves.”
He threatened to eject them from the courtroom if they do.
The trial continues today.
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2009/oct/20/defense-questions-habits-victims/
Posted October 20, 2009 at midnight
http://media.knoxnews.com/media/img/photos/2009/10/19/102009carjack2_t160.jpg
Defendant Lemaricus Davidson observes the proceedings on the first day of his capital murder trial Monday.
The defense team for the alleged ringleader in a torture slaying tipped its strategic hand Monday with a startling suggestion — this random attack on a Knox County couple may not have been so random after all.
Lemaricus Davidson’s defense attorney, David Eldridge, alluded to this claim in opening statements, telling jurors they would wind up questioning the state’s version of events “at the beginning” of what long has been viewed as a carjacking gone wrong. He did not elaborate.
But co-counsel Doug Trant later followed up with a question posed to slaying victim Channon Christian’s best friend, Kara Sowards, that offered a bit more clarity.
“Would it surprise you to learn (Christian and boyfriend Christopher Newsom) were seen at the Exxon on Cherry Street (before they were slain)?” Trant asked.
Davidson, 28, is standing trial this week on a slew of charges ranging from kidnapping to rape to murder in the January 2007 slayings of Christian, 21, and Newsom, 23. Prosecutors Leland Price and Takisha Fitzgerald have a mountain of forensic proof, including Davidson’s DNA on Christian’s clothing and body; his fingerprints on the couple’s belongings; and his palm print on a trash bag in which Christian’s body was wrapped and stuffed inside a garbage can in Davidson’s Chipman Street home.
But Eldridge told jurors it wasn’t surprising that Davidson’s prints would be on items in his house because he lived there. He intimated that the “gang from Kentucky” — co-defendants Letalvis Cobbins, who was convicted in August, George Thomas and Vanessa Coleman — killed the couple and left behind “all the evidence conveniently to be found in Mr. Davidson’s home.”
As for the DNA evidence, Eldridge said, “All the DNA is going to show you is that Mr. Davidson had vaginal … intercourse (with Christian). We believe it will show you Mr. Davidson did not cause the injuries (to her vaginal area).”
“You will have real questions about whether Mr. Davidson was even in the Chipman Street house when (Christian) was killed,” Eldridge told jurors.
Trant later quizzed witnesses about the victims’ alleged drug use. He elicited testimony from Newsom’s friend, Josh Anderson, that Anderson and another friend removed marijuana from Newsom’s truck shortly after Newsom went missing. And Trant questioned Sowards about a marijuana pipe in her apartment — she said it wasn’t hers — and a prescription bottle for hydrocodone belonging to another Christian friend found in Christian’s Toyota 4 Runner. Sowards said the friend probably left it there accidentally.
When prosecutors began asking witnesses who lived in the Chipman Street area if they’d ever seen Christian and Newsom in the neighborhood, all said no. But Trant asked one of those witnesses, “You didn’t go there to buy drugs, did you?”
A toxicology report on both Christian and Newsom did not reveal the presence of drugs or alcohol.
The line of questioning upset family and friends of the two victims. During a lunch break, a Newsom relative made a comment as Trant walked by that he later reported to Judge Richard Baumgartner as “derogatory.” The judge was livid.
“I will not tolerate that,” he told the families from the bench. “They are officers of the court. They have been appointed by this court to represent Mr. Davidson. They are doing this job at the direction of the court. This is their obligation. They do this at great sacrifice to themselves and their families.”
The judge ordered the families not to make “public” statements to or about the attorneys in court or out, though it’s not clear how he could legally bar them exercising their free speech rights outside the courtroom.
“You are not in any way to impugn them,” he said. “If you want to go home and talk about them in your living room, have at it. But you are not to do that in this court or on the airwaves.”
He threatened to eject them from the courtroom if they do.
The trial continues today.
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2009/oct/20/defense-questions-habits-victims/