Justice for Jonathan Ferrell – Closing Arguments

We are following the trial of Randall (Wes) Kerrick the Charlotte/Mecklenburg police officer charged with voluntary manslaughter in the killing of unarmed Jonathan Ferrell.

Closing arguments are scheduled for today.  It will be live streamed. I’ve found conflicting times.  Court Chatter has their live stream scheduled for 8:30 a.m.  A news source reports that closing arguments are scheduled to begin at 12:30 p.m. EST.

The link to court chatter is http://www.courtchatter.com/#!randall-kerrick-trial-stream-1/c6ga. 

Some live streams have horrible sound, so I will continue to look to see if other sources are live streaming.  If anyone else finds another source, please post the link in comments.

The following are videos of Kerrick’s cross-examination.   The second video is when the prosecutor noted that Kerrick gave inconsistent answers on his employment application.





Posted on 08/18/2015, in Cases, Jonathan Ferrell, Trial Videos and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 56 Comments.

  1. yahtzeebutterfly
  2. yahtzeebutterfly

    We are watching live streaming of closing arguments. I think it is still important to show what reporters are choosing as being important to tweet out.

    Chris Miller’s and Pam Escobar’s tweets about Prosecution’s closing argument:

    Chris Miller ‏@ChrisMillerWBT
    Special Deputy Attorney General Adren Harris begins his closing argument

    Harris says Jonathan Ferrell did not pose a threat

    Harris: “absurd” that Ferrell was in the neighborhood to commit a crime

    Harris: Ferrell stays in well-lit front yard after home’s alarm goes off

    Harris: “That’s foolish” to say Ferrell meant to cause harm to homeowner

    Harris: defense “wants to demonize” Ferrell

    Harris says defense lying about Ferrell’s behavior, plays dash cam recording again

    Harris: “Show me where’s he’s patting his thighs. Let me know when officers give him commands before shooting a Taser.”

    Harris: “In their minds, Jonathan already committed a crime.”

    Harris: “They were there to Taze, arrest and ask questions later.”

    Harris: Ferrell “didn’t see the defendant.”

    Harris: “Who was the defendant defending?”

    Harris: Ferrell was running to avoid being shot

    Harris: Kerrick “abandoned all his training,” could have used non-deadly force

    Harris: “He panicked.”

    Harris: Kerrick had time to transition from lethal to non-deadly force

    Harris: “The mere fact that someone is running at you is not a green light to shoot.”

    Harris reminds jury of firearms instructors motto of if there’s any doubt on whether to shoot, don’t

    Harris says Ferrell’s DNA was on Kerrick’s uniform because “he was bleeding, he was dying.”

    Harris once again accuses defense of lying

    Harris holds up one of the bullets recovered from Ferrell’s body

    Harris: Ferrell being larger than Kerrick “doesn’t give him the right to shoot.”

    Harris: “The defendant’s bad decisions ended Jonathan Ferrell’s hopes and dreams, face down in a ditch.”

    Harris: “The defendant made a bad choice when he pulled that trigger 12 times.”

    Harris: “I’m not saying he’s a bad person. But he made a bad choice.”

    Harris reminds jury of his opening statement: “Who polices the police when they do wrong? You do.”

    Harris: “How do you police the police? Find the defendant guilty of using excessive force.”

    Pamela Escobar WBTV ‏@ReporterPam
    Prosecutor: w/out dashcam video #JonathanFerell would just be another man that dies at hands of police

    Prosecutor: officers trying to demonize this young man, it’s easy to say he got what he deserved

    Prosecutor: people lie, the video doesn’t

    Prosecutor: officers there to taze and arrest not to investigate

    Prosecutor: #JonathanFerell runs in that direction b/c it was the only way. Kerrick said he looked past, exactly he was running to get away

    Prosecutor: if #JonathanFerell wanted a gun he would have grabbed closest Ofc. Little’s gun. Ferrell ran to avoid being shot

    Prosecutor: Kerrick had non-deadly options at his disposal. He abandoned all of his training

    Prosecutor: Kerrick had enough time reholster gun. someone running at u does not give u right to shoot

    Prosecutor: image is a lie because defendant says it is. Kerrick said Jonathan was on bottom of legs :

    Prosecutor: defense says defendant is small guy. That doesn’t give you the right to shoot b/c of your size, their size

    Prosecutor: #JonathanFerrell’s hopes and dreams ended face down in a ditch

    Liked by 1 person

  3. The defense attorney is omitting too many important details. Had Jonathan wanted to break into that house, all he had to do was push the woman back because she opened the door. It’s absurd to think that a man who would physically struggle with another man with a gun, wouldn’t just knock the woman out of the way and come into her house if he wanted to.

    Liked by 2 people

    • yahtzeebutterfly

      Exactly, Xena. I think that Jonathan would be alive today if Kerrick had used his reasoning and common sense to realize that instead of being driven by his emotions.


  4. The defense attorney has turned into a bore. I hope the jurors had a good night’s sleep because he would put me to sleep.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Court is in recess until 12:15 EST.


  6. yahtzeebutterfly

    Chris Miller ‏@ChrisMillerWBT
    Defense attorney George Laughrun accused prosecutors of playing the race card #KerrickTrial

    Laughrun: jurors should feel insulted by prosecution inserting race with an MLK, Jr., reference in closing argument

    Laughrun quotes scripture: “Blessed are the peacemakers.”

    Laughrun points out Officer Little fired a Taser, says Kerrick isn’t the only officer who thought Ferrell posed a threat

    Laughrun: CMPD training for use of force “is all over the place.”

    Laughrun: prosecutors “trying to pull your heartstrings.”

    Laughrun: “This case is about… failure to comply with law enforcement commands.”

    Laughrun: “Thornell Little yelled ‘stop!’ If he stopped, we wouldn’t be here.”

    Laughrun: “This case is about split second decisions” by Ferrell and Kerrick

    Laughrun: Kerrick “was trying to do what’s right.”

    Laughrun: “Don’t you think he rues the day he uttered five words: ‘add me to the call.”

    Laughrun: Ferrell could have called his co-worker with whom he just smoked marijuana after his wreck

    Laughrun: “If you don’t think there was an attempt to break into (the home)” look at the front door

    Laughrun: “Let’s look at the door! There must be five places that have been hit and hit.”

    Laughrun: “Who charges at police? Choices! That’s what this case is about.”

    Laughrun: “Officer Kerrick made the choice that changed his life. ‘Add me to the call.'”

    Laughrun reminds of the information Kerrick was being fed by a 911 dispatcher en route to the breaking and entering call

    Laughrun: Kerrick didn’t know if the suspect was armed

    Laughrun: “All of you have to take parts of the case and seek the truth.”

    Laughrun: prosecutors didn’t call Officer Thornell Little, “they didn’t want you to hear the rest of the story.”

    Laughrun: “They darn sure didn’t you want to hear from the DNA expert.”

    Laughrun: prosecutors only wanted to cherry pick portions of Kerrick’s interview

    Laughrun: “You should be offended.”

    Laughrun: homeowner and Officer Little “said the exact same thing” about Ferrell’s demeanor

    Laughrun: “If this is just a knock on the door, ‘I need help,’ why did investigators see fit to remove the door” as evidence?

    Laughrun: “The dash cam probably creates more questions than answers.”

    Laughrun: “The lack of evidence is the evidence in this case.”

    Laughrun: the prosecution would have you believe if it didn’t happen on camera it didn’t happen

    Laughrun shows dash cam recording

    Laughrun replays it again, this time at half-speed to highlight Ferrell’s behavior

    Laughrun: Kerrick had 5-6 seconds to react

    Laughrun: the medical examiner sketch the prosecution called “a lie” is based on scientific evidence

    Laughrun: Ferrell was already bleeding before he encountered Kerrick, says blood was on the door

    Laughrun: Ferrell was grabbing the gun before he was shot

    Laughrun quotes detective’s initial comment to Kerrick: “You’re not in any trouble.”

    Laughrun: “This man went out on the scene and walked investigators through the crime scene.” He has nothing to hide.

    Laughrun: doesn’t Ferrell not having shoes on sound like more bizarre behavior?

    Laughrun on prosecution use of force expert, CMPD’s Mike Campagna: “They had to have someone say Kerrick violated policy.”

    Laughrun: “Just maybe they couldn’t find anybody” else but someone on CMPD command staff

    Laughrun: “Does that make sense for this officer to reholster his weapon” and go hand-to-hand?

    Laughrun: “When it doesn’t make sense, it adds up to reasonable doubt.”

    Laughrun: Kerrick was rated “as a solid officer,” that’s what his supervisors told you

    Laughrun plays firearms training video to show how quickly officers have to react to someone coming at them

    The scenario Laughrun showed required a decision on force in three seconds

    Laughrun points out Ferrell’s drug use, says it might have been why Ferrell blew through a Taser and ignored commands

    Recording of 911 call of a breaking and entering being played

    Laughrun tells the jury to remember the sound of Sarah McCartney’s voice

    Laughrun: McCartney’s demonstration of Ferrell’s pounding on the door was so loud it knocked the computer off

    Laughrun: prosecutors didn’t want you to hear that 911 call

    Laughrun circles back to the dents in the door: “The eyes don’t lie.” #

    That line plays off prosecution’s “The camera doesn’t lie” line about the dash cam

    Laughrun: why didn’t prosecution want you to hear from Officer Little? Why wasn’t he disciplined?

    Laughrun: “Just because it’s not on the video doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.”

    Little testified Ferrell yelled “shoot me!” before Little fired a Taser at him

    Judge Ervin lets the jury take a break

    Defense objected to Laughrun’s references to Officer Little’s testimony

    Pamela Escobar WBTV ‏@ReporterPam
    Defense: This is about choices. #JonathanFerrell could use cellphone, walk back to friend’s house, knock on door

    Defense: jury should be concerned with what prosecutors didn’t want them to know, officer Little, radio traffic, 911 call

    Defense: dash cam video raises more questions than answers. Lack of evidence is evidence

    Defense: playing video at half speed for jury

    Defense stopped video before gun shots are heard

    Defense: police told Kerrick before first interview you are not in any trouble, really, He’s on trial for his life.

    Defense: NC & CMPD have blank check to prosecute case. Couldn’t find anybody else than Captain to say violate policy

    Defense does not have to put up evidence. Says jury wouldn’t hear everything if they didn’t

    Defense going through evidence and time Kerrick was told to go lethal when someone else pulls taser.

    Defense: why in the world would they not want u to hear what the officers were saying to each other?

    Defense: prosecutors didn’t want jury to hear from Officer Little. Why is that?

    Defense: just because it’s not on the video doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. (video creates tunnel vision) Little said Ferrell said shoot me

    Jury is getting morning break

    Mark Becker ‏@MarkBeckerWSOC9
    Laughrun replays dash cam video… Counts 5-6 seconds that changed lives

    Liked by 1 person

  7. yahtzeebutterfly

    Chris Miller ‏@ChrisMillerWBT 10s10 seconds ago
    Break over, court back in session


  8. Geez. These time zones really mess me up. Court is back in session.


  9. yahtzeebutterfly

    Continuation of Defense’s closing:

    Chris Miller ‏@ChrisMillerWBT
    Laughrun quotes Officer Little saying he would have pulled a gun if he “got into a tussle” with Ferrell

    Laughrun: Will Kerrick get to go home tonight? Will his son only get to see home on visiting days?

    Laughrun: Kerrick took the stand, opened himself up to cross-exam, “because he wanted you to hear from him.”

    Laughrun on inconsistencies: “You don’t remember every nit-picky detail” on the worst day of your life

    Laughrun: “Don’t be fooled by nit-picky cross-examination.”

    Laughrun: “Where’s the DNA found?” Holds up a picture of Kerrick’s gun. “Right there.”

    Laughrun reminds jury of lethal force training to “shoot until the threat is negated.”

    Laughrun: Ferrell was within arm-length of Kerrick, “clawing at him”

    Laughrun: “If you think he may be guilty, is probably guilty, that’s not beyond reasonable doubt.”

    Laughrun: “You’re not going to hear the judge say that if he violated policy he’s guilty.”

    Laughrun: “Would you buy a used car from this table?” Points to prosecution.

    Laughrun to jury: “You’re the conscience of this community. Your verdict can’t be based on emotion.”

    Laughrun: “Go back there and find this man not guilty.”

    Laughrun ends his closing argument. Prosecutor Teresa Postell now gives the second-half of the state’s close.

    Pamela Escobar WBTV ‏@ReporterPam
    Defense: ask jury to stop & think about the worst day of your life. You won’t remember nitpicky details

    Defense: five words will haunt him forever, add me to the call

    Defense: reiterates use of force expert, you shoot until the threat is negated

    Defense: DNA found on gun when #JonathanFerrell grabbed the gun

    Defense: Kerrick shrouded with presumption of innocence. Burden of proof lies with prosecution. Burden doesn’t shift

    Defense: Kerrick shrouded with presumption of innocence. Burden of proof lies with prosecution. Burden doesn’t shift

    Defense: Ferrell family has acted w/ class and dignity. Suffered a loss, will stay with them forever. Will stay with Kerrick family as well

    Liked by 1 person

    • they say you shoot until the threat is negated, at no time during this encounter was there any “threat” to any officers life or any threat of great bodily harm, the only evidence on the video shows the victim did NOT attack the closest officer, did not reach for his weapon, did the opposite in fact tried to avoid contact…..and the silly claim just because it isnt on the video doesnt mean it didnt happen? say what? little claims he was pacing around in a circle acting very erratic, indeed that is NOT on the video so when exactly did this happen? it didnt…….he claims he said shoot me twice, yet again that is not on the video sound track WHY NOT? because again he did not say that….

      Liked by 2 people

      • Right, Bill, Jonathan was no threat. I liked the way that the prosecutor drove-in “reasonable person.”

        Yeah — the defense wants the jury to believe what they say rather than what they see. I noticed he tried using the “seeing” as an emotional response to deciding based on evidence.

        Did you catch where the defense tried to say that Jonathan attempted to break into the house BEFORE he crashed his car? That is ridiculous. There comes a point where things thrown against the wall insult the intelligence of jurors and impugns all credibility. I truly hope that the jury returns a verdict of guilty.

        Liked by 2 people

        • i didnt listen to any of it because hearing these defense lawyers that are officers of the court LIE really bothers me, that they dont even get questioned on their obvious lying shows the entire system is corrupt…….telling jurors who are you going to believe what you saw with your own eyes on the video OR are you going to accept the FALSE statements made by officers that are again shown to be false on a video we all saw?

          Liked by 2 people

          • I haven’t seen where the state pointed out anything like you did about when & where the bullets hit Jonathan & that he would’ve pretty much been unable to breathe and barely able to move-voluntarily anyways, after the few shots. the way you analyzed them was very comprehensive to me. and a VERY compelling reason to conclude kerrick was absolutely lying about Jonathan ‘assaulting’ him! i’m gonna watch the video now of kerricks testimony and see if the state ever goes there.

            Liked by 1 person

          • i fear just like with fogen(zimmerman) they dont want to win this case…..they are part of the system that is corrupt…..hammering home that reality that the first 2 shots that hit the victim while he was standing would both be fatal in less than one minute, of course he fell forward after those shots, and of course that puts him closer to the shooter, and of course his body moves some after those 2 fatal shots, but “fighting” simply isnt possible….and ALL of the shots came from some distance because there was no evidence found of the extra stuff that comes out of the barrel on his clothing or body…….by his own first admission the first 2 shots came from around 10 feet away, later changed to 3 to 5 feet……..this was clear excessive force but the prosecution neglected the facts that would establish that.

            Liked by 2 people

        • i watched most of the defense closing & the guy completely fumbled! all he could do was accuse the state of not wanting the jury to hear from so&so, not wanting the jury to see know such&such. his only defense is to act like the state was hiding stuff.
          Yeah i also heard him suggest that Jonathan was probably looking for another “VICTIM” to burglarize!

          but you saw Zimmerman’s lawyer win by telling the jury to NOT use their common sense!

          Liked by 1 person

    • YES! I’ve had a few ‘worst days of my life!’ the most recent was 8yrs ago when her sister called & told me my best friend was dead.
      And before blacking out (obviously found out later) immediately after she said the words ‘she’s dead,’ I remember being surprised seeing her number on caller ID, i remember every single word of the conversation, what she said, what I said, where I was standing, even that my son’s nanny was right beside me on the patio.

      I tend to black out &/or faint when i’m traumatized so i only remember stuff up to a certain point. but i remember EVERYTHING up to that point!
      And if one of those days was that i was so scared that i killed a man, i’d remember every fucking detail of what & who scared me and what i did to ‘stop the threat!’

      But Kerrick can’t ‘remember’ cuz he’s a LIAR! and his fellow LIARS can’t keep to the script cuz they’re liars too!
      So if he insists he doesn’t remember every ‘nit-picky detail’ of the day he murdered an unarmed, innocent person it’s only because it was NOT the worst day of kerrick’s life??!!~~

      Liked by 1 person

  10. yahtzeebutterfly

    Chris Miller ‏@ChrisMillerWBT
    Prosecutor Teresa Postell now gives the second-half of the state’s close.

    Postell addressing “a few things” in the defense’s close

    Postell: “Police officers are here to protect the community. They are not at war with citizens.”

    Postell: “Officer Little’s not credible.”

    Postell: recording of 911 call isn’t relevant

    Postell downplays medical examiner’s sketch: there were “any number of positions” Ferrell and Kerrick could have been in

    Postell: “This case is about the defendant shooting an unarmed man ten times.”

    Postell: defense was “grasping at straws”

    Postell on defense case: “It’s just a whole bunch of stuff to get you distracted.”

    Postell: killing someone with excessive force is voluntary manslaughter

    What to consider for voluntary manslaughter deliberations :

    Postell: “The defendant had the authority to defend himself with reasonable force.”

    Postell: “The defendant shot Jonathan ten times, and that was excessive, and that’s voluntary manslaughter.”

    Postell: “What you’re here for is to see that this was excessive force, and that you’ve seen over and over again.”

    Postell: “Did the defendant really believe Jonathan (posed) the threat of death or serious injury?”

    Postell: Ferrell was not moving toward Kerrick with a football-like tackle

    Postell: non-deadly force should have been used.

    Postell: “He just could not use his firearm because someone walked up to him.”

    Postell: “There was no indication (he) was going to take his gun.”

    Postell: “He never told you he thought Jonathan was pulling a weapon. He said he didn’t know one way or another.”

    Postell: if he thought he was going to lose his gun, he could have emptied the cartridge as he was trained to do.

    Postell: “This is really not a tough case. Excessiveness in this case isn’t tough” to determine.

    Postell: “What would a reasonable person do? Go hands on.”

    Pamela Escobar WBTV ‏@ReporterPam
    Prosecutor: if this was going to be anything it was going to be a fight, just a fight

    Prosecutor: defendant never told you that Jonathan was pulling the weapon.

    Prosecutor: you have 2 clues what a reasonable officer would do. Two other officers, one taser and other hands on

    Postell holds up the baton and Taser Kerrick could have used instead of his gun

    Postell: “This is what he did to Jonathan.” Shows the jury pictures of Ferrell’s fatal wounds

    Postell: “Ladies and gentleman, that’s excessive force. That’s more than what was reasonably necessary.”

    Postell: “The state has met its burden and done its duty. Now it’s time to do your duty.”

    Postell: “Follow the law, and find the defendant guilty of voluntary manslaughter.”

    Jury opts to hear their jury instructions now instead of hearing them after lunch


  11. Like

  12. It’s now up to the jury. We’re on verdict watch.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Kerrick calling him the “suspect” like that. smh

    this is crazy how he easily kerrick lies on the stand. it’s scary

    Liked by 1 person

    • again the prosecution failed to point out a “suspect” of what please? you added yourself to a call about someone at the door of a home possibly trying to break in, BUT you went to that home and found NO “break in” so there was no crime done and no “suspect” involved after finding no break in happened….so at this time what exactly makes him a “suspect” in your mind? which brings me to this point, the officer had already played this type situation out in his mind and already decided long ago he would SHOOT first and then have his already thought out defense ready, he was assaulting me, i had no choice, it was a life or death struggle, it happened so fast, he tried to grab my gun…….but the FACTS show the officer shot him from a distance with 2 fatal shots while he was upright and then 8 more shots after he fell to the ground dying.

      Liked by 2 people

      • yahtzeebutterfly

        So very sad.

        For Jonathan to be down and dying, and then have the shooter decide to shoot 8 more bullets into Jonathan. The horror that Jonathan experienced is just too much to imagine.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. Here are the videos of today’s closing arguments.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. yahtzeebutterfly

    I am disturbed that the Defense (and Kerrick on the witness stand) kept on with the incorrect story that Jonathan was a suspect…that he had broken in and entered the home of the 911 caller. Why do this two years later when it is obvious that Jonathan was seeking help after his car crash?

    From prosecution’s closing argument of Special Deputy Attorney Adren Harris:

    So Jonathan goes to this home, and he knocks on the door. He pounds on the door. And Ms McCartney, the owner of the home, was inside, comes down, opens the door, sees Jonathan, slams the door.

    Now, during this time, Jonathan never makes any threats. He never breaks any weapons. He never tries to force his way into the home. In fact, he never runs around the back and tried to kick in a door. He never tried to come through any windows.

    Where is he standing? Jonathan is standing in a well illuminated area with a spotlight on and another light is by the door. He’s lit up.

    softly He’s trying to break into a home???

    What is he wearing? Jonathan is wearing a very loud, bright colored teal shirt with pressed slacks and no shoes.

    What does he do? He goes to the front yard and yells, “Turn off the alarm, come back” to Ms McCartney.

    (inaudible) says to himself that he is going to commit a crime??? Nonsense. Nonsense.

    He has no phone. He has no get-away car..but he is going to commit a crime???…that’s what they want you to believe. That’s foolish.


    • yahtzeebutterfly

      “softly” refers to the level of volume of the prosecutor’s voice. I had marked it in italics forgetting that the whole transcript section above would be appearing in italics because it was in “blockquotes.”


  16. yahtzeebutterfly

    RadBerky ‏@RBerkywcnc 6m6 minutes ago
    Reporters and crews waiting as jury resumes deliberations. @Wcnc


  17. yahtzeebutterfly

    Kate Gaier ‏@reporter_kate 3h3 hours ago
    Jurors ask to see 8 things in private, including dashcam video, interviews w/Kerrick,Little,Neal & use of force directive

    Amy Cowman ‏@amywccb 3h3 hours ago
    Jury also wants to see photos of cars positioned at scene and interviews of 3 officers after incidents, along w dash cam

    Kate Gaier ‏@reporter_kate 2h2 hours ago
    Jurors want aerial photo of cop cars, transcripts from Ofc Kerrick, Little, Neal interviews. Going to lunch first

    Briana Conner ‏@BrianaReports 28m28 minutes ago
    There is a “clean lap top” with all 4 videos the jury requested loaded on it so they can watch in private

    Pamela Escobar WBTV ‏@ReporterPam 13m13 minutes ago
    Judge reading voluntary manslaughter law again to jury since they asked for self defense definition

    Briana Conner ‏@BrianaReports 9m9 minutes ago
    judge reiterates instructions, sends jury back with paper documents and laptop w all videos except 1


    • AHHH. Thanks for the info. It looks like someone on the jury is arguing in favor of self-defense, but this is a case of excessive force. Based on the State’s closing argument, Kerrick had a right to defend himself by non-lethal force, and it looks like that judge is holding the jury to decide whether Kerrick instead voluntarily used lethal force when he had other options available, including the presence of two other officers.

      Liked by 1 person

      • i agree somebody on the jury is arguing self defense…..could a citizen use self defense based on saying they were running towards me? could a group of 3 citizens get away with that when one of them fired the shots? is it reasonable to say i feared death or great bodily harm from an unarmed person when they have 2 more heavily armed people right there wearing the same uniforms?….it is on video the victim did NOT attack the closest officer in fact he dodged him, clearly showing it was not his intent to attack an officer…..he was running into the darkness after he left the video, and again had already shown he was NOT trying to attack an officer.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Bill,
          Good analysis. I don’t know North Carolina law on self-defense, but it looks like there was no language in the jury instructions giving the jury that option. The video of closing cut-off as the judge was reading jury instructions. I’ll see if I can find the jury instructions and if so, will post them here.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Bill, while I was looking for the jury instructions, I see that you’ve tried to make sense of this case elsewhere. 🙂 There is so much ignorance that it makes me very sad. For one, people need to stand in the shoes of members of the jury. The jury sees the demeanor of the witnesses. They hear testimony and in this case, inconsistent testimony and testimony not based on facts.

          Liked by 1 person

          • that the jury sees the video and hears officer little make claims that are obvious lies, pacing around in a circle? not on the video…yells shoot me twice, again not on the video……the shooter claiming he was “walking” toward him then speeds up to a full charge when the video shows him running and dodging the first officer and then 3 SECONDS later he is being shot = the video shows the shooter LIED and that is not a minor detail….and the defense closing argument that the victim was looking for another house to break into? that is a total insult to the jury, barefoot, no car, no weapons, but he is looking for a house to break into? why would he do that? he already knows the alarm went off at the house he asked for help at, he had no way to escape and no means to carry anything he could steal……it is upsetting that the jury even takes this long, when they know the police LIED on the stand.

            Liked by 1 person

  18. yahtzeebutterfly

    Caroline Vandergriff ‏@c_vandergriff 12m12 minutes ago
    The judge has sent the jury home for the day. They’ll resume deliberations at 9:30 tomorrow morning


    • Fantastic! Thanks so much for finding them.

      Liked by 1 person

    • under those instructions the only possible verdict is guilty, because there were 3 officers on the scene 2 of them did NOT see the use of lethal force as needed or reasonable…….the first officer he ran towards did not shoot him and had no fear of him doing harm, that fact would also show a reasonable person he had no intent to harm an officer.

      Liked by 1 person

    • officer neal is the one that drove up and it is his dash cam we see? i asked because he claims the victim started running before he even started his car, even though he had just said kerrick turned left and i followed him which mean they should have arrived at almost the same time and that is what the video shows……”by the time i start my vehicle, um, he was running towards , uh both the officers”…..just read some more and i cant read any further…..this LYING officer claimed he saw the victim swinging at the shooter trying to hurt him……first off a person swinging their fists will HIT their target…..secondly there was NOT enough time for this to happen, 3 SECONDS after leaving the video the shots begin……and the shooter made NO MENTION of seeing any fists being swung at him……..this trial is a FARCE a judge should look at the statements and video and inform the jury the police LIED in their statements and on the stand!

      Liked by 1 person

      • i just looked at his video and it clearly shows he was to the left of his car when the first shots were fired, he could NOT POSSIBLY even see what was going on, so his entire description of the pre shots contact is 100% MADE UP he saw NOTHING.

        Liked by 1 person

  19. yahtzeebutterfly

    Pamela Escobar WBTV ‏@ReporterPam
    Jury sent note. They want 5 items

    Jury wants to know if #JonathanFerrell was left or right handed, wants to see Kerrick’s injury photos

    Jury wants essay Kerrick wrote when he applied to police academy. Lawyers say it was never submitted as evidence even though he was asked

    Jury also wants transcript of Lt. Brady’s testimony. But court reporter who took it not in court today

    Brady was supervisor who counseled Kerrick about using a taser and a gun as back up after two tasers were pulled

    courtney francisco ‏@cjfranciscowccb
    Jurors also request crime scene evidence report.

    Dianne Gallagher ‏@DianneG
    #JonathanFerrell’s “dominant hand” was not covered in the trial, so judge tells jury they will have to use best judgement

    Pamela Escobar WBTV ‏@ReporterPam
    Jury now being brought in to find out what they can get from requested list

    Jury told they will get photos of Kerrick’s injuries and diagrams from crime scene investigator report

    Judge told jury rely on recollection of testimony for what Brady said and whether #JonathanFerrell was left or right handed

    Chris Miller ‏@ChrisMillerWBT 4m4 minutes ago
    Judge Ervin only okays two of the requests: a crime scene tech’s report and pictures of Kerrick’s injuries

    Pamela Escobar WBTV ‏@ReporterPam 2m2 minutes ago
    Judge explained the court does not answer factual questions

    Jury sent back to deliberate


    • Sounds as if someone on the jury is trying to make Jonathan the bad guy rather than focusing on the facts and evidence that were brought out at trial. They evidently wanted the judge to answer factual questions to support their position, so it’s back to deliberating another day.


      • that is what i cant understand…..there was NO evidence that the victim broke any law, the only thing he did was run when he saw those red dots on his chest taking himself hopefully out of the line of fire……and the dents on that front door were not much since the officers at the home did NOT see them when checking it out….and he was barefooted which means he didnt kick it very hard or he would have hurt his own foot…..certainly not kicking straight on with his toes…

        Liked by 1 person

        • Bill,
          Absolutely! Jonathan was injured in the crash, and he was looking for help. By Kerrick killing him, he cannot give his side of the story.


  20. yahtzeebutterfly

    Robin Kanady ‏@RobinFox46 2m2 minutes ago
    Jury going home for the day, no verdict #KerrickTrial


  21. yahtzeebutterfly

    Pamela Escobar WBTV ‏@ReporterPam 28m28 minutes ago
    Jury not brought into courtroom. Still deliberating

    All lawyers and judge left courtroom, in chambers. Do not know what they are discussing. Kerrick still at table

    Complete silence as judge calls attys to talk abt something. He was handed a note a few min ago, hasn’t said what it’s abt.

    Lawyers back. Defense lawyer whispering in Kerrick’s ear.

    Judge is back but no robe. Courtroom still at ease


  22. yahtzeebutterfly

    jim bradley ‏@jimbradleyWSOC9 15m15 minutes ago
    #KerrickTrial – attorneys have left courtroom to talk with judge again. Not sure what it’s about. @wsoctv


    • my guess is the jury is saying they have one person that wont deal with the facts shown to them…….their questions yesterday indicated to me they are trying to get the judge to give them the words to change one person’s mind on self defense.


  23. The jury was deadlocked after its first 3 votes.

    Before lunch, judge ordered them to press on

    At 3 p.m. check in, foreman says discussion since lunch has been productive

    Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/crime/article31719573.html#storylink=cpy


  24. It turns out that the jury was deadlocked 8 to 4. I don’t know if the 8 are for guilty or not guilty.


%d bloggers like this: