Day 4, Advocacy

TAKE HERE: Who is who, calendar and links for complete coverage

Midday update:

A few hours after Markeis McGlockton's shooting death in front of Circle A's food store, Michael Drejka was sitting in the corner of a white-walled interrogation room, in a substation in the office. of the Pinellas County Sheriff.

In front of him were two detectives, George Moffett and Richard Redman. They asked Drejka what had brought her to the fatal argument earlier in the day in front of the store.

"Every day, a person stops in the handicapped area," said Drejka. "I have a pet peeve about it."

From a soft voice, his hands sometimes resting on a table, Drejka said he saw a car parked in the space reserved for disabled people that day.

He described how he inspected the vehicle and saw no sign indicating a disability. He recounted the argument that followed with the driver, Britany Jacobs, who said that her boyfriend would come to the outside and settle the situation. He told the detectives how McGlockton had pushed him to the ground and how he had pulled a pistol and shot McGlockton.

A jury watched a video of the one-hour interrogation on Thursday in the murder trial in Drejka. Drejka, 49, says he was defending an imminent attack when the shooting occurred. He said as much in the interview.

"As I start leveling my weapon, he's taking his next step towards me and adopting the 21-foot rule," Drejka said.

"He said something?" Asked Moffett.

"Negative," said Drejka. "Not a word … He took a step towards me, and that was it.

But as they questioned him, the detectives revealed holes in the memory of Drejka's events.

He told them that he feared an imminent beating.

"Why did you think the guy was going to beat you?" Asked Redman.

"Because I just came out of nowhere blind-side," said Drejka. "What else can I think? … I have never been in this situation before.

"What if I told you that I'm watching the video (surveillance) and at no time does it come running to you?" Asked Redman. "He's actually taking a step back."

Drejka said that would not be accurate.

Throughout the conversation, Drejka used military and police terms. He repeated that he had "neutralized" the threat.

He stated that he had a concealed weapons license and that he had been carrying a weapon since the age of 22 years.

He was asked why he had put himself in the situation to start. If he was so concerned about parking a car in a place reserved for people with disabilities, why not just call the cops?

"Why bother you (the police) with that stupid thing I've had?"

He was asked if he had taken a look at the man he had shot. Drejka said that he only saw the legs and hips. He could see that the man was black.

"If he was not contracted, I would never have pulled the trigger," he said.

"The feet said that he was coming towards me and hips too."

Towards the end of the interview, Moffett informed Drejka that McGlockton, the man he had shot, was dead.

Drejka paused.

"Thank you for telling me," he said softly.

He was asked if he wanted to say anything else.

"Other than the stand your thing on the ground," he said. "I did exactly what I thought I was supposed to do at that time, taking into account what was happening to me."

– Dan Sullivan

KATHRYN (12:01)

The court goes to bed for lunch. The jury will return at 13:01.

KATHRYN (11h37)

Bedard identifies himself as a police trainer and consultant. He is based in Tallahassee.

Attorney Scott Rosenwasser establishes Bédard's credibility. He asks how many times Bédard has examined cases of use of force. Around 300, he says. Did he also testify for the defense? Yes. Would he consider himself well aware of Florida's laws regarding the legitimate use of lethal force? Yes.

Rosenwasser turns to this particular case. Bedard says he has watched all the video and the statement that Drejka gave the detectives, both the video recording and the transcription.

"Is there any terminology that caught your eye?" Asks Rosenwasser.

Yes. He says he heard Drejka use "jargon" or "police talk". One of them was the rule of 21 feet. Another was force multiplier, a military term. Bédard wondered what kind of training Drejka had.

Rosenwasser request: Are these terms also covered by the term "threat assessment"? Yes, said Bedard. What does it mean?

"Threat assessment is about being able to observe what's happening in an environment and identify threats. … it's an orientation on environmental signals, basically. "

Rosenwasser asks another question and Trevena asks Judge Bulone to come closer. They now have a bench conference.

Bulone tells the jurors that they will do "some legal analysis here" and give them a 10-minute break. They come out of the audience room.

KATHRYN (11h20)

Attorney Schaub interviews Heather Meade, a forensic scientist at the Sheriff's Office.

She was not at the scene but went to the agency's northern district station, where detectives interviewed Drejka.

Schaub reviews several Drejka photos taken by Meade during her interview on filming day.

"Did you notice any injuries on his face?"

"Did he complain of facial injuries?

She continues to browse the photos, pointing out an abrasion and rash on one of her arms. There was also redness in the left wrist, which, according to Meade, was due to handcuffs.

Schaub then takes out photos of Drejka without his shirt and Meade says there was no visible injury.

Camareno begins his cross-examination. You said no visible injuries, no? Yes, she says.

Do you remember Drejka saying that he had pain in his right shoulder? Yes, she says

Later, Camareno asks, "Are you in agreement that he was compliant, cooperative?" Yes, he was.

Do you remember that at one point, Drejka used his shirt as a makeshift sling? Yes.

Schaub, on the redirect, asks if Drejka has already asked for medical care. No, she said.

Meade withdraws. Roy Bedard, expert on the use of state force, is the following.

DAN (11:03)

We are back from the break.

After the members of the jury sat down, Judge Bulone read to them a statement of the facts, which counsel for both sides agreed. The statement reads as follows: "Markeis McGlockton was not armed when he was shot and had no weapon or gun on him at any time."

Drejka's lawyer, John Trevena, is conducting the cross-examination. He asks if Drejka was injured. Drejka mentioned that she had a sore arm and made a makeshift scarf with her shirt.

Trevena then asks about Moffett. He is no longer employed by the agency? That's right, said Redman. No need to explain why he left the agency, which is intentional. The judge said the defense could not talk about Moffett's arrest for a DUI charge or dismissal. More about it here.

On the redirect, prosecutor Schaub asks Redman if Drejka has sought medical attention. He did not do it, said Redman.

Redman is finished. Another forensic technician from the sheriff's office is next.

KATHRYN AND DAN (10:39)

In the video of the interview, the detectives return to the state of mind of Drejka.

"What goes through my head is that he's coming back to me again? … I think he's going to end up with what he's just started.

"What he would have done is only pure conjecture."

This statement reminds me of something that Drejka's lawyer, Bryant Camareno, said in his opening statement yesterday: "Although Mr. McGlockton does not have a weapon, he was the weapon … The danger may not even be real. It is the appearance of danger that may prompt him to act legitimately, excusably and in self-defense. "

Drejka uses another tactical term, "force multiplier". The detectives ask him what kind of things he reads. He says that he reads a lot, but not something specific to guns.

"I know firearms less than a lot of other things in my life."

Towards the end, Moffett told Drejka, "Just to tell you that the man you killed is dead."

There is a break. Drejka responds very gently, "Thank you for letting me know."

Something else, do they ask?

"Outside your ground position," Drejka said. "I did exactly what I thought I was supposed to do at that time, taking into account what was happening to me."

The video ends. Now for a 10-minute break.

KATHRYN AND DAN (22h27)

The detectives ask Drejka why he did not call the police about this place reserved for people with disabilities.

"Do not you think, instead of putting yourself in this kind of situation, it could escalate, because people are crazy," said Moffett, you should have called the police?

"What does that have to do with … me being on my back and …?" Said Drejka.

Later, he concedes the point, but he asks, "Why bother you (the police) with that stupid thing I've had?"

They continue with this line of questioning.

Red man: "Do you think that when you go up and talk to these people, informing them of their parking, they may not take this right? That could go a little aside?

Drejka: "And certainly, but that's why I'm taking precautions too.

Red man: "Like that?"

Drejka: "Well, I'm a very careful person and I have a license."

Drejka says that he has been carrying a gun since the age of 22. He is 47 years old at the time of the video.

But, says Drejka, "if he retires, I do not need to use my firearm."

"And if he is still?" Redman asks.

"In this case, I still do not need to use my firearm."

He asked him if he could see the man who had pushed him.

"I saw her legs. I know that he was a black guy. That's all. "

On set.

"If it was not contracted, I would never have pulled the trigger," says Drejka.

He says that he has not had time to think about it.

"I do not shoot him with the intention of pulling the trigger," he says.

"The feet said that he was coming towards me and hips too."

DAN AND KATHRYN (10h19)

The video of the interrogation continues. Drejka is lying on the floor to show her actions after being thrown to the ground.

He told the detective where to stand to show how close McGlockton was.

"Did he charge you?" Ask the detective.

"Two steps in progress," says Drejka.

"I thought the kicks came."

"I thought he was going to do the rest … no matter what shots would be inflicted thereafter."

"It must hit me so hard from the start, what else should I expect?"

"He barely made the second step before I pulled the trigger."

"Why did you think the guy was going to beat you?" Redman asks.

"Because I just went out of nowhere. What else can I think? … I have never been in this situation before.

Detective Moffett: "What if I told you that I watched the video and at no time did it come running to you? He takes a step back. "

Some murmurs come from the gallery. On the video, Drejka says it would not be accurate.

The detective asks if he heard McGlockton say anything after the shot.

"Just pain," says Drejka. "That's why I guess it's been touched."

So he did not threaten to finish his job?

Drejka says it was just "an assumption" – "Any intelligent person would have" made that assumption.

It uses more font terms. He does not stop saying that he "neutralized" the threat.

"I shoot to save my own ass, that's it."

Drejka begins to talk about an earlier incident in which he took pictures of a tanker truck parked in the same place.

He said the driver "wanted to pick me up".

He says he took the company number from the side of the truck and complained to the driver's boss.

Drejka is asked about his training with firearms. He says that he has not been training with a gun for years.

He says his father has been a cop for about 20 years.

"I was not allowed to be a cop," says Drejka. His father would not leave him.

He says he practiced sitting but not lying.

"I knew that the session would … come into play at some point."

DAN AND KATHRYN (10:11)

The video begins.

Drejka, dressed in a green shirt, sits at the end of a table in the corner of an interrogation room with white walls. Beside him is Detective Moffett, who writes on a notebook. Redman is also present, off screen.

Moffett begins with some basic questions: Drejka's address, date of birth.

Drejka's voice is calm. He says that he parked his car.

"Every day, a person stops in the disabled area. I have a pet peeve about it.

He explains the argument with Britany Jacobs.

"She took it as an affront that I would talk to her that way."

"I just checked the signs, simply."

"I told him it was not very polite to park here when other people need to use it."

"I was hit on the left side and thrown straight in the extension of his car."

He stands up to show how he stood when he was pushed.

"I'm pretty sure I put my wrist under my gun because it hurts like a son of a bitch now."

Drejka uses a policeman term to describe what happened.

"When I go out, I start shooting my weapon. As I begin to upgrade my weapon, he takes his next step towards me and adopts the 21-foot rule. "

"He said something?" Asks Moffett.

"Negative," says Drejka. "Not a word."

"He took a step towards me. And that was it.

He keeps on:

"I ended up getting up and making sure all the threats were clear, then holstering my weapon."

Then, "someone screamed about his children. … All that I remember, screaming about the children … All I remember, screaming about the kids.

Then he says, "I completely cleared the situation" and I went back to the car. He unloaded his gun and tidied it in his car.

After putting his gun in the car, Drejka said, he walked to the front door of the store and asked the clerk when he had a video surveillance. Drejka says that he knew that Circle A had nine surveillance cameras in the store.

The employee, who was on the phone, nodded.

In the jury gallery, the jurors take a look at the interview video in the binders containing the printed copies of the transcript.

The detective comes back when Drejka arrived at the store. Drejka says he could not say that anyone was in the car parked in the disabled area. He did not know if he was still working, he said.

Then the driver, Britany Jacobs, lowers the window and asks him what he is doing. He tells her that he is looking for signs of disability.

"What matters to you?" Jacobs replied, according to Drejka.

"Well, it does not matter if my mother-in-law is not there now and needs a place to park."

The detective asks if there is someone in his car who was disabled.

No, said Drejka.

"What I remember is that she said," Do I have to go get my man? Are we going to fight?

What Jacobs said exactly was controversial yesterday.

A witness seemed to say in his testimony that he had heard Jacobs say, "I'm going to fuck you."

The witness said during his testimony on Wednesday that he had never heard of that. It was rather her interpretation of what she meant.

Here is Jacobs' testimony on Wednesday: "" Do you want me to get my man back? "I said that as in maybe he will leave me alone, maybe he will back away if he knows that I have someone with me …" "He said," Yes, if you want him to fight.

Jacobs' answer to Drejka's questions: "Who are you talking to? Who do you think you are? "

The detective asks Drejka why he would not call the police if he feared people were illegally stationed.

"Because all we had was a verbal argument between two people," says Drejka.

"But would not it be better to call the police to tell them that there is someone who is illegally parked?" Said the detective.

Drejka says that she would be gone before the police arrived.

"They always do."

KATHRYN (9:49)

Schaub answers Detective Redman's questions about his interview with Drejka. How Redman is involved, where the interview took place, he listened before coming to court today (he did).

The interview was "just a shy one o'clock," says Redman.

Schaub says he wants to play a video of the interview and asks to distribute copies to jurors.

Interestingly, this appeared in a Time interview with Mark O'Mara, the lawyer who was acquitted of neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman following the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. Reading the video could give Drejka a chance to stop testifying. Here is an excerpt from this trial guide:

Drejka participated in a long interview with the police after the shooting, but only the state can introduce this statement in the courtroom. That's why Zimmerman did not testify, O'Mara said. Prosecutors presented five Zimmerman statements to the police and the media.

"And I'm sitting here, going," What are you doing? "O'Mara said. "Thank you thank you, thank you, but why are you doing this?

Prosecutors need to think before introducing Drejka's statements and give her a chance to get away from the testimony, said Lave, a professor in Miami. The perception of the jury in relation to the defendant counts enormously, so that the testimony may put the defense at a disadvantage.

"Self-defense … in essence, is an intentional act. You did not kill him by mistake. You killed him because you thought you were doing it, "says O'Mara," You better explain why you decided to take a life.

In court, Judge Bulone gives the jury preliminary instructions before viewing the video: "The court informs you that the video has been edited to eliminate irrelevant parts that would not help you understand the case. "

He also says that even if they have transcripts, they have to trust what they hear in the video and not what they read.

KATHRYN (9:38)

Detective Upton says he read Drejka's warning of Miranda. "You have the right to remain silent," and so on.

That's just about everything the prosecutor Schaub asks.

Now, Trevena is ready for cross-examination. He asks about the wording of Miranda rights, pointing out that "can and will be used against you by a court".

"And despite that … he has fully cooperated, is not it?" Yes.

That's all for Upton.

Detective Richard Redman, one of the detectives who interviewed Drejka (about here and here), is next. The other detective, George Moffett, was sacked from the sheriff's office in January after being charged with driving under influence at the scene of the crime.

DAN (9.30am)

During cross-examination, the lawyer John Trevena questions Soutullo on the changes made to the video to improve the images. It says to have modified the contrast to facilitate the visualization of the edges of the objects in the image.

Soutullo is excused.

The next witness is Detective James Upton from the Pinellas Sheriff's Office. At the time of the shooting, he was a victim of robbery / homicide.

DAN (9:23)

Our first witness today is Joseph Soutullo, a media forensics specialist at the Pinellas County Sheriff 's Office. He collects digital multimedia evidence related to crimes.

In the Drejka case, he copied the surveillance video from the Circle A store where the shootings occurred and examined him. He says the video was a typical surveillance video. It could only be played with specialized software.

Soutullo has extracted from the video a series of still images of the size of a poster. He also improved the images to zoom in on the area showing the shot. And he reduced the frame rate so that the video is played back in slow motion.

Attorney Fred Schaub displays still images of the filming video. He then plays the original video at normal speed.

We see a remote truck in a parking space near an ice machine. We see the victim, Markeis McGlockton and her young son enter the Circle A store. We see Drejka getting into a silver SUV and approaching McGlockton's car parked in the disabled reserve. He walks to the back and then the front. We see him gesturing as he talks to Britany Jacobs, McGlockton's girlfriend, who is inside the vehicle. They speak for several seconds. McGlockton walks out of the store, pulls up his shorts, then goes to Drejka, throwing him to the floor.

Drejka, at the back, pulls a pistol almost instantly and points his arms up, towards McGlockton, touched. McGlockton comes back to the store.

The speed with which all events unfold is remarkable.

Schaub then broadcasts a surveillance video taken from inside the store. We see the counter, an employee in a white shirt. A woman approaches to make a purchase. We see McGlockton and her son waiting behind her. McGlockton's son is having a drink. The door opens, a man appears to say something and McGlockton goes out. The video ends.

Schaub now plays the slowed version of the video. One wondered if the jurors would see the slow version or not. More about it here.

KATHRYN (9h)

Hello. We are back in court this morning for more testimony in the state case.

But first, a word from McGlockton's parents. Their lawyer, Michele Rayner-Goolsby, said in a press release yesterday that the family was disappointed that no African-American was retained by the jury.

"The victim in this case was a black man from this community," said Rayner-Goolsby, and according to the release, "there are elements of his lived experience, as well as cultural realities related to belonging to a community. Black race in the will probably come in the procedure. "

But, she added, the jury reflects the racial demographics of Pinellas County. Recent census data show that Pinellas County is about 83% white and about 11% black.

Rayner-Goolsby also nodded at Judge Bulone's efforts to ensure the defense does not strike potential jurors based solely on race. More about this on our live blog Day 2:

The defense attempted to hit an African-American juror, with one of the three black jurors remaining in the jury group. Attorney Fred Schaub objected, asking for a reason other than race.

Defense lawyer John Trevena said it had to do with his work in the medical field in a trauma unit. He also said that the defense team's jury consultant had found some previous arrests of the woman.

The future juror indicated on her written form that she had never been charged with a crime.

Judge Bulone recalled her to discuss these arrests, which she later explained. She seemed to have some confusion as to whether she had been arrested or charged with the crimes. She left the room again.

Bulone asked if the defense was publishing sheets on each prospective juror.

"The problem is not that she has a criminal record," said Coy defense attorney. "The problem is that she failed to talk about it in the jury form."

The judge asks again if they used rap sheets for each future juror.

"Si vous aviez été sincère à ce sujet, vous l'auriez fait avec tout le monde, pas seulement avec les Afro-Américains", a-t-il déclaré.

La situation s’est tendue après que l’avocat John Trevena eut rejeté l’implication.

«Je dois faire une véritable analyse», a déclaré Bulone. "Cela fait partie de mon travail."

Trevena et son avocat, Bryant Camareno, ont commencé à lire les antécédents d’autres jurés potentiels pour le prouver.

Bulone, apaisée, interrogée sur leurs préoccupations professionnelles

"Quelqu'un qui travaille quotidiennement dans un traumatisme peut avoir certains sentiments au sujet de … quelqu'un qui est touché par une balle", a déclaré Trevena.

Bulone a fini par autoriser la grève, à contrecœur.

"Disons simplement que je ne suis pas convaincu à 100%, mais je suppose que sur la base de la prépondérance des preuves, je vais l'accepter", a-t-il déclaré.

Mise à jour du matin: Un deuxième jour de témoignage

Le procès devait reprendre à 8h45 jeudi devant le juge du circuit de Pinellas, Joseph Bulone.

Mercredi, les procureurs et les témoins ont expliqué aux jurés ce qui s’est passé lors de la fusillade contre Markeis McGlockton. Ils ont entendu comment Drejka s’est disputé avec Britany Jacobs, la petite amie de McGlockton, parce qu’elle s’était garée dans un espace réservé aux personnes handicapées. Ils ont entendu comment McGlockton est sorti, se sont approchés de Drejka et l'ont poussé par terre. Et ils ont entendu comment Drejka a sorti une arme à feu et tiré le coup de feu.

Dans sa déclaration liminaire, l'avocat de la défense Bryant Camareno a demandé aux jurés de réfléchir à la manière dont Drejka avait perçu les événements. Un enregistrement vidéo du tournage est un élément de preuve essentiel dans l'affaire.

Camareno a déclaré: "Bien que M. McGlockton n'ait pas d'arme, il était l'arme."

– Dennis Joyce

Context

Michael Drejka, 49 ans, est accusé du meurtre, le 19 juillet 2018, de la mort par balle de Markeis McGlockton, âgée de 28 ans.

McGlockton s'est arrêté à 15 h 30 près du magasin d'alimentation Circle A, au 1201, chemin Sunset Point, près de Clearwater. Sa petite amie, Britany Jacobs, s'est garée dans un endroit réservé aux personnes handicapées, à l'extérieur du dépanneur, et a attendu dans la voiture avec deux des enfants du couple – 4 mois et 3 ans à l'époque. McGlockton, 28 ans, est entré dans le magasin avec leur troisième enfant, Markeis Jr., qui avait 5 ans.

Drejka entra dans le parking et s'approcha de Jacobs. Il a demandé à Jacobs pourquoi elle s’était garée à cet endroit si elle n’avait ni plaque ni plaque désignant un handicap. Les deux ont commencé à se disputer. Cela a dégénéré au point que d'autres personnes sur le parking ont commencé à prêter attention.

Un des témoins est entré dans le magasin et a raconté ce qui se passait. McGlockton se retira dehors, s'approcha de Drejka et le poussa au sol. Drejka a sorti une arme de poing Glock de calibre 40 et a tiré sur McGlockton une fois à la poitrine. McGlockton a été emmené à l'hôpital Morton Plant et sa mort a été prononcée peu de temps après. L’incident entier a été filmé sur la vidéo de surveillance du magasin.

Chaque jour, notre équipe de couverture d'essai présentera les événements de blog directement à partir de la salle d'audience.