Law&Crime Sidebar - 7 Critical Moments from YNW Melly’s Double Murder Trial Week Two

Episode Date: June 23, 2023

Rapper YNW Melly, born Jamell Demons, is on trial for allegedly killing two of his friends in 2018. The drama in the courtroom continued in week two with a mask controversy, the prosecution violating the rules, and new evidence potentially tying Melly to a double murder. The Law&Crime Network’s Jesse Weber breaks down seven critical moments from week two of Melly’s double murder trial.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Save 10% on your entire POM Pepper Spray order by using code LAWCRIME10 at http://bit.ly/3IGNFxvLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergWriting & Video Editing - Michael DeiningerGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa Bein & Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieObjectionsThey Walk Among AmericaDevil In The DormThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller

that will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. Is there currently a critical threat on your life? Yes. In terms of the, is there an amount of money assigned to the death of you that It's been offered up. Approximately $50,000. A mass controversy, the prosecution violating the rules, and new evidence potentially tying a wrapper to a double murder. We do a recap of week two of the YNW Melly trial.

Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. I have covered a lot of stories at Law and Crime. And if there's one thing I can tell you throughout all of them, it is that you have to have. to stay safe. And that's why I want to talk to you right now about palm pepper spray because this can really help. This is a discreet but powerful personal defense tool. Palm pepper spray actually shoots up to 12 feet and it uses the strongest legal formula of pepper spray. It is super safe. It is easy to use. It is ready to fire. All you got to do is just point and spray. And the best

part, we got a promo code for you. You can save 10% by using code law crime 10 at pompeper spray.com. And always remember, call 911 if you see somebody in trouble. Well, week two has wrapped up in the YNW Melly double murder trial out of Broward County, Florida. The murder on my mind rapper, whose real name is Jamel Demens, is charged with the actual murders of his two friends and fellow YNW group rappers, Christopher Thomas Jr., or YNW Juvie, and Anthony Williams, or YNW sackchaser. The men were found shot to death on October 26, 2018. after Mellie's co-defendant, Cortland Henry, also known as YNW. Bortland, pulled up to the hospital with the bodies of Thomas and Williams in the car, but he claimed they were all victims of a drive-by shooting. But the evidence has suggested that this was a staged drive-by shooting and that the shots actually came from inside the vehicle. Prosecutors say that after the four left a recording studio, Melly shot the victims, and then he and Henry took the car to an area where they fired a,

upon the car, staging it to look like a drive-by shooting. Mellie then gets out and Bortland arrives at the hospital. The prosecution even highlighted how the defendant was a member of a gang called G-Shine Bloods, and that may have played into the motive in this case. We'll get into that. But we can't forget that there is a lot at stake here because the death penalty is on the table if Milly is convicted. Now, you see the law changed in Florida. It used to be you needed a unanimous vote for the death penalty, all of the jurors voting in favor. Now the law has changed. All you need is an eight to four vote by the jury to impose the death penalty. So now let's recap week two. And the week started off with the introduction and analysis of

cell phone evidence. Now, cell phone evidence is interesting. Why? Well, cell phones, we carry them all the time. They're basically like personal trackers, right? They're used all the time in trials to show the whereabouts of a defendant. But let's see exactly how this played out here in this case with the testimony of FBI Special Agent Brendan Collins, who discussed two phones. And it seems that one phone is associated with Mr. Demens and the other with Mr. Thomas, again, one of the victims. What can you tell us about where the blue phone and the red phone were? at 320 so generally in the area around new era studios okay as you're moving across the slide what are we looking at so we see a series of towers that

the red foam and blue film were clarified as they move from east to west so there's a line of towers generally in this area kind of one five five down at 75, and then the last ones at the end of the slide are the west kind of by the intersection a U-Power that's near the intersection of Pines, and at U.S. 27, the tower is 63035, Sector 15, at 3.57 a.m. That tower saw each of these phones. And based on your training and experience, what does that tell you about how the phones were moving in relation to one another, between 320 and 357 a.m. Yeah, so, in my opinion, that's consistent with devices moving germany together.

Okay. So you mentioned that there are some in which there is red and blue together. So I want to focus in, there's one here, it looks like at the intersection, Flamingo Road and I-75, rather, the red with the blue. What does that mean when you have them overlayed like that? So that power saw both the red phone and blue. So you have these two phones that are seemingly traveling together, and it seems the state is alleging that Y&W. Melly was operating that phone

as it was hitting towers and going to key areas the night of the shooting. There was a map that was presented to the jury, and it had areas on there pinned like the crime scene and the reported shooting. And significantly, the prosecution has asserted that the cell phone data shows that at Y&W. Melly or Mr. Devin's was with the victims about 15 minutes before they were taken to the hospital. But here is the problem that I see at least for the prosecution. Aside from the defense, arguing that the radius on the map is quite wide of each cell phone and maybe that doesn't accurately pinpoint precisely the location of the phone, the bigger

question or the argument that's raised by the defense is that it's not even clear that Y&W. Melly was using the phone, that it was even in his possession. The defense argued that that phone was used interchangeably by multiple people and was used even after Demons was arrested. Now, the prosecution doubled down on this because they wanted to really put that phone in the hands of Mr. Devin. So what did they do? Well, at one point, we saw some interesting text messages from one of the phones. The prosecution presented these messages to show that this was Demmon's phone. I'll you an example. There was a conversation allegedly between Demons and his mother, Jamie King. Jamie King is sending a text message to her son. Send me your location. I'm in Stewart. I love you so

much. He then sends a return the location showing at her about the time of the crime as to who was using and doing that. Okay. Love you again from Jamie King. saying, I'm at your gate, I'm going to get the trash. The next response is bring Mariah, which you've honored already heard testimony, that Felicia Holmes, her daughter, Mariah Hamilton, was in a dating relationship with this defendant and that at this time and that there was conversations and that she has identified Mariah as Maria Hamilton. Then there is okay.

It continues. he then asked his mother to buy him a gloss ASAP and telling her like go now so she then responds okay what's wrong she says I got your 45 then his response I just don't want no illegal gun well that's not illegal continuing on but I'd rather have a Glock 40 or 19 she says okay his response is I'll pay you when you get down here she then says okay then your honor I object to this is she going to read the entire phone this is not this does not go to the heart of our objection This is being done for the cameras. Counsel, I asked her to put on a proffer of what she anticipated.

This is what she's telling me and how it's relevant. Go ahead. Okay, so that was the phones. Now let's move on to DNA. Broward Sheriff's Office analyst Kurt Rhodes took the stand. And Demin's DNA, as he said, was not a match on a lot of the evidence that was tested, like a spent casing, a water bottle, sandals, bloods. stains on a t-shirt and sneakers, his DNA did not match on any of those items.

But Mr. Demmon's DNA may have been found somewhere else. On a three-person mixture, on item number 43, squaw, the rear driver-side door and handle the through. Yes. Were you able to analyze the profile of the defendant, Jamal Demons, in this case? I did. And what was your conclusion in a three-person mixture? as to the results of Mr. Devon seen included or excluded?

He was included, the likelihood calculation. The DNA results are at least 2.12 times 10 to the 8, or 212 million times more likely if they originated from Jamel Devons and two unrelated, unknown individuals than if they originated from three unrelated, unknown individuals. And what verbal qualifier do you? qualifier did you give to that particular item? Very good.

There's very strong support for the inclusion. So Demons' DNA may have been found on the rear passenger side door handle of the Jeep where the two men were killed. Now, on one hand, that's not very surprising because we already know that Demons was in that car. There's even surveillance footage of him getting into that car after the recording studio on the night of the murders. But if prosecutors can definitively establish that the shooting happened from inside the car and from the back based on ballistics and trajectory and the medical examiner's report, this DNA evidence could help them.

But there is something interesting about that DNA finding. And that is that the first test that law enforcement conducted on that handle, it didn't test positive for Demmon's DNA. It was a second test that was conducted just this month, just before trial, that was a potential hit. Let's hear the defense jump on that issue of testing. Then you analyzed, did you not, item 26, a yellow jacket, a gator, a bag bottle, correct? Yes, that's true. And what date did you examine those items? That was on August 24th of 2021.

August 24th, you said? Correct. Of 21. That was two years approximately after he was arrested. Did you know that? I didn't know. And those came from inside the G.

Did you know that? I did not. And those did not match Jamel, correct? That's correct. That's correct. He was excluded. Sir, did you know that when you received the blood stain on the headliner, that was after this trial started?

I didn't know. No. But you start that in April 25th of 23? Just two months ago? The headliner was, that was prior. Oh, I'm sorry. The item that you received on April of 203 was well. Those were the contact swab, non-blood area of rear driver's seat.

The blood swab of smear from rear of driver's seat. driver seats and the contact swab of front of driver, side door, handle interior. Okay. And you did not know that was after this trial started, correct? I did not know. And none of that came back to the DNA of this young man, Janelle, correct? Correct. It was deemed uninterpretable, as well as one of the others.

I did not attempt to generate DNA profile because there was insufficient amount of DNA. And did I hear you correctly that you first ran a test and it did not come back matching or belonging to our contributor to Jamel? That's correct. And did I also hear you correctly. hear you correctly then we discussed something about your software with your supervisor with the technical here yes and then ran another test and had a three-person contributor and all of a sudden it matched or was labeled as Jamel may have been a contributor that's correct what date was that sir

That was on June 1st, 20-100. Three, approximately three weeks ago? Yes, sir. First test didn't find DNA, but then a second test may have. As you heard, Rhodes was sent items to examine years after YNW. Melly was arrested. And at times, seemed to not know where the items are recovered from. And I believe this all goes towards something that the defense has argued, that police conducted a shoddy investigation, that it was sloppy.

And so their results and their findings have to be questioned. That seems to be the point that the defense is making for the jury. Now, week two of the Y&W Melly murder trial was certainly not without its share of drama, and that brings me to the judge, Rowered Circuit Judge John Murphy. So first, he gets pretty irritated when something as simple as the prosecution printing off documents for the defense becomes this whole back and forth. This happened during the discussion on cell phone evidence. The defense brought up the issue that the state had emailed them a report on the morning of court,

but they didn't have a physical copy. look at, so they asked as a professional courtesy if the state could print them off the documents. Now, listen to how that unfolded. So I have an email, but I'm asking for paper forms so I can follow along. Understood. Yes, yes, that's exactly. Thank you. So can you make copies of those?

I have printed. I found all of them. If there's one that she's missing, I'm happy to do so, pull them up again. I printed them all this morning. Kosser's suggesting she doesn't have them. So I just want to make sure she has. Of course. And that's a little problem.

So they've all been turned over via. this is all in there the original copies as well that were provided council does not have the ability to print something out in the courtroom now she's asking the council was raiding flipperies asking for the copy of it let's provide our copy I'm happy to do so I just need to know exactly which one she says she's missing and which one she says she has I don't want to have to duplicate them as possible none of the documents she's published so just give me a courtesy print all of them out all right

We can. Can we finish this first? Oh, yes. I thought you're going to make copies of all the document. So she has in her hand some of them already. So I just want to make sure I don't double printing. Just double printing that. Council is suggesting she doesn't have it.

So it's just a prim wall. Okay, well she doesn't have some of it. That's going to make sure. What's your rest of them? I don't know. You're saying it's, you're said. Council's suggesting she hasn't received those. hasn't received those things.

I just want her to get copies of it. I don't want your constant back and foremost. She has it. Just get her the copies. That's it. It's easy. Just get her the copies. And the judge was also none too happy with the prosecution again when he said that

they committed a discovery violation. You see, the state can't introduce something into evidence and use it in their case if they haven't shared it with the defense. In other words, there could be no surprise attack. There could be no ambush. So outside the presence of the jury, this issue concerned the state conducting a new test on existing evidence, and it wasn't shared with the defense. And as you'll see, the judge said, the prosecution wasn't playing fairly. And it seems to me to be a Richardson violation.

They're a discovery that's ongoing and you know about it and you're not telling them about it until we're here in the court. So as far as I'm going to have been already concerned, I think that's a discovery violation. and I'm finding it to be a discovery violation. The only way it can be curious, he's not gonna testify about this second procedure that happened. That's not coming in. That's new, new discovery. The defense doesn't have an opportunity to depose the witness.

Defense doesn't have an opportunity to do X, Y, and Z. That's just not the way it should be. It shouldn't be done by surprise. So it's clear this was not a new item. This was just this, all of the information supposed to be identical. You found it. You had a meeting with the detective in May.

When we're in hiatus because I'm on vacation, all right? Got a meeting with them in May after we picked a jury. And when we're ready to, or we're in the middle of jury selection, you picked it, you did it and you said, well, he tells you or you ask him if you have more, you know, programs to go ahead and provide the information and you find out there's a another program and he runs the program does a different download with something other than cell bright and therefore you have more information don't make the defense aware of it you hold that to yourself you go ahead and put on a couple

weeks of trial testimony and then when it comes up after he in cross-examination point something out oh you bring it up and say well by the way you know I told the detective in our pretrial meeting, it came up and he has the program and we can use it and we're doing it. But you didn't, you don't tell them about it. Just go ahead and hold it. Keep it close to the best yourself. Don't explain it to him. And then you say, when it comes up at trial, I say, what was it? I don't have the report yet. You know, that's why it didn't turn it over to them. It didn't disclose it's coming. It seems to me that's not what's supposed to happen. Not supposed to happen, period. That's a discovered violation.

It just seems to me that this is a fundamental fairness thing. You have evidence, you need to turn it over to him. If you didn't turn it over to him, you can't use it. That's really the basic. Now, the drama did not end there, because now I want to talk about Detective Danny Polo from the Broward County Sheriff's Office. Detective Polo works in the gang unit. He's undercover, and he was brought in to establish the connection between Y&W Melly

and the gang, the G-Shine Bloods. again, this is a gang that the rapper was allegedly affiliated with. Remember, the prosecution is of the opinion that the motive behind killing Mr. Thomas and Mr. Williams was to, quote, benefit, promote, and further the interests of a criminal gang. Here's the problem, though. Polo was wearing a black mask in court. You could really only see his eyes. Why? Because he said it was for his safety and the safety of his family. He even stated that a hit had been placed on his life. Gang work clearly very dangerous and he didn't want his face to be revealed.

Now, the defense took issue with this because as part of the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution, a defendant has a right to confront witnesses against him. And to have a witness who disguises himself, arguably that is a violation of the defendant's constitutional right. That was the defense's argument, but the judge ultimately ruled to allow Polo to testify with the mask, appreciating his safety concerns. By the way, for our trial watchers and our sidebar listeners, do you remember when we covered the XXXTentacion murder trial? Well, Detective Polo testified in that case, and he wore a mask in court. So back to this one, Polo testifies with the mask on, and we're going to get to the substance of what he said in a minute. But first, the jury.

had a problem with the mask. And they write a couple of notes to the judge. The first note indicated that was a question. Why does he get to see us and we don't get to see him? So I think that lets us know that it's the mask that's of concern. My concern is the second message that the jury sent over. she asks for a woman. But, so the record's clear, it says,

I need a woman. I can't listen properly when I was a child. I've seen someone get robbed, and I am having an anxiety attack. So my question is, if she's able to proceed with it, or this is going to somehow call her her thinking. That's what I'm mostly concerned with respect to the council. From there, the judge actually took the opportunity to speak with the juror, the juror who had the issue with the mask, seeing something like this because it reminded her of when she was robbed in the past. Pretty incredible. Let's listen to that back and forth.

Are you able to sit as a juror where you think this is too much for you? I'm trying to figure out, and that's why we took a little extended lunch break to figure out whether you feel comfortable and you're up to. Yes, I feel comfortable, but I just don't think it was appropriate for someone to be masked up like that. And plus you guys didn't even tell us, like, you just, and you don't know what people have been through. So it just, like, it shocked me, like that shocked. So, yeah, but I do feel like I can do it with that just was an appropriate. I'm sorry? I said I don't believe that was appropriate.

Well, some things I make. certain decisions about things and then we go forward with it and I instructors and are you think you'd be able to follow those instructions and you pay attention to the evidence or do you think that you're concerned about the masking that is going to affect your ability to follow the instruction and follow the evidence yes i can listen to all the evidence now that I know he's going to have one mask. And the anxiety issue were past that, you're okay? Yeah, it's like my medication.

Thank you. Yeah, that's a new one. I haven't heard that one before, but it's understandable, right? It can be a bit triggering, seeing someone wearing what looks like a robber mask, a ski mask like that. But this trial is continuing on, and I want to now focus on the substance of Detective Polo's testimony, because that's really what's key here. Remember, his testimony, seemingly, is being put forward by the prosecution to establish the connection between YNW Melly and this gang.

Let's take a listen. So there's multiple videos of Mr. Demons claiming G-Shine or GKB as a game that he talks to me. What about adopting the style or dress of a criminal gang? Yes, Mr. Devons was observed multiple, multiple times, more times that I can count, wearing the color is red, the color is green, and like I stated, the foot sovers are told to wear tan or brown, and Mr. Demons, there's a bunch of pictures of him wearing this tan trench coat that falls in mind with the time where he would have been a full soldier. And so we'll come back to some of those pictures in a moment. What about adopting these of hand signs that's identified as used by a criminal gang? Yes, Mr. Demons, those all the gang signs, and he does them very well.

You can do them very quickly, a lot faster than I can. Physical efforts would be the videos of Mr. Williams, throwing up hand signs, the videos of Mr. or demons saying the gene shine oath their motto all the social media posts references he makes some songs about being a blood that's all physical evidence okay so I want to go and so we'll get to that in just a moment so Detective Fuller are you taking into consideration that this could be a character or an act that's put on for social media? No, I don't believe this is an act or a character.

This is, as I stated, at G-Shund is one of the more violent. Blood sets, they're the ones that are enforcing when other people are false repping, and that's what they're known for. So if a famous person were to false rep g-shine, they would quickly get checked. There's no recanty, there's no apologizing. There's no one calling out Mr. Demons for being a fake blood. There's all I could find is support for Mr. Demons for being blood by other bloods.

Again, furthering the idea that YNW. Melly was a part of a dangerous gang. Now, is that enough to establish a motive here? which by law, the prosecution doesn't have to prove. Motive is not an element of a crime, but it helps. It helps tell the story of why Mr. Demons would suddenly murder his two good friends. Did he allegedly kill these two men to show his loyalty to this G-Shine Bloods gang? Did he do it to promote the gang to further their interests? Perhaps the prosecution will further explore that idea as the trial continues into week three.

well that's all we have for you right now here on sidebar everybody thank you so much for joining us please subscribe on apple podcasts spotify youtube wherever you get your podcast we very much appreciate it i'm jesse weber i'll speak to you next time you can binge all episodes of this long crime series ad free right now on wondery plus Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.