Law&Crime Sidebar - High School ‘Love Triangle’ Led to Teen’s Brutal Murder with Knife, Sword: Court Docs

Episode Date: September 5, 2024

Two of three suspects in a Miramar, Florida murder entered guilty pleas in court, admitting to their roles in the attack. Christie Parisien admitted to luring Dwight “DJ” Grant, 18, to an apartment complex stairwell, where she says Jaslyn Smith and Andre Clements held him down. Clements, who has maintained his not guilty plea, allegedly stabbed Grant with a knife and sword. Law&Crime’s Sierra Gillespie breaks down the horrific case with attorney Matt Hinson.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: Get 50% off of confidential background reports at https://www.truthfinder.com/lcsidebarGUEST HOST:Sierra Gillespie https://x.com/sierragillespieLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger and Christina FalconeScript Writing & Producing - Savannah WilliamsonGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&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. views 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. Two women will spend decades in prison after they admitted to their role in a high school love triangle gone horribly wrong. Attorney Matt Hinson joins us to talk about the disturbing details the investigation uncovered and the final aspects of the case that still need to be resolved. Welcome to Sidebar presented by Law and Crime. I'm Sierra Gillespie filling in today for Jesse Weber. Two young women, ages 19 and 20, pled guilty to charges of second degree murder, tampering with evidence and conspiracy to commit murder in a Florida courtroom. And investigators

say it all connects back to their co-defendant. Andrew Clements and a jealous feud. The story takes us back to October 2021, when 18-year-old Dwight Grant, who went by the nickname DJ, disappeared. He was found dead two days later, behind some bushes at an apartment complex. DJ had a knife wound in his neck and a sword. Yes, you heard that right, sword wound in his chest. Detectives found surveillance video and text messages that incriminated three of DJ's classmates

at Miramar High School. Christy Peresian, Jasmine Smith, and Andre Clements III. We checked out the Truthfinder results for all three suspects and found their criminal records. You just searched using info like name, age, and location. For example, prior to his arrest in 2021, Andre Clements just had traffic citations. But now, the search shows his charges for first-degree murder, conspiracy, and tampering with evidence. We actually used Truthfinder a lot in our research for Sidebar. one of the largest public records search services in the U.S. TruthFinder can also pull

up registered sex offenders in your area, which is super helpful just for peace of mind. And with a paid subscription service, you get access to unlimited reports for almost anyone. Right now, you can get 50% off your first month of confidential background reports at truthfinder.com slash Elsie Sidebar. So back to the case, Parisian was reportedly dating Clemens and Smith was their friend. Clements apparently thought DJ was a romantic rival. Detectives found text messages Clements sent to Parisian a week before DJ disappeared, and they said things like, quote,

murder will definitely happen soon. It'll be bloody and help me kill him. Smith reportedly told police that Clements said DJ had raped his ex, but when police spoke with the ex-girlfriend, she said she'd had a consensual sexual relationship with DJ. She'd also gotten some threatening text messages from Clements saying she needed to get used to DJ not being around anymore. Police also had surveillance video showing parts of the attack on DJ. Parisian allegedly lured DJ to an apartment complex with the promise of sex,

leading him into a stairwell where Clements and Smith were allegedly waiting to strike. Smith told detectives that Clements used a knife and sword on DJ and Clements and Smith were then allegedly seen carrying a lifeless body out of the stairwell and dropping it into the bushes. Police say the trio then tried to use cleaning products and fire to get rid of the evidence. When DJ didn't come home and then didn't show up for school the next day, his mom got worried and then got in touch with police. Officers just followed a trail of blood and that led to DJ's body. A grand jury indicted Clements, Peresian, and Smith with first degree murder, tampering with physical evidence, and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder.

They'd all pleaded not guilty, but that changed just last week. Parisian and Smith, who are both adults now, entered guilty pleas and admitted to their parts in the brutal attack. Parisian led DJ to the stairwell, while Smith brought the knife and sword to the apartment complex. She also helped restrain DJ when he tried to get away. Both women have maintained that they didn't take Clemens' threat seriously until it was too late. The judge sentenced both of them to 25 years in prison and then an additional 10 years of probation after that. According to South Florida news stations, both Smith and Parisian cried in court when DJ's

mother spoke about her loss. The women are now expected to testify against Clements, who has maintained his plea of not guilty, and while his trial gets underway in January, it seems Clements will be representing himself in a handwritten motion to dismiss one of his counts. Andre Dexter Clements III names himself as pro se. That's 16-page motion laid out why Clements felt the court needed to throw out count three, which is conspiracy to commit murder. His attorneys filed a motion for continuance over the summer, saying they would be prepared

for trial by January, but they also reported that Clements would be representing himself in court with his public defenders acting as standby counsel. Okay, we've got a lot going on here, from a teenage love triangle gone wrong to a now turn state witnesses and a defendant planning to represent himself. So to begin to make sense of all this, we've got to turn to attorney Matt Hinson. Matt, thank you so much for joining us today. Absolutely. I appreciate you having us back. And one of the reasons we wanted to speak with you specifically today, Matt, is your history and advocacy for the victim. That's something we don't want to lose in this story. What are you feeling about that in DJ, who's the victim in this case,

how he and his family are likely feeling. What do you make of all of that? From a feeling standpoint, I can't imagine what they're going through, both the family and the community. I'm sure that everyone is shocked, and they should be. If they're not shocked, we have a problem in society. But as well as saddened, and, you know, one of the things I think we don't focus on enough in the media

is we're not focusing on the victim in terms of the life they led and the legacy they're going to leave behind. I think we focus a lot on the crime because that is what, we cover in the media, but I think that it's important not to forget the person that was lost and who they were as a person, not just how they died. In this case, we want to make sure to continue to bring his memory and talk about him, which is one of the reasons why we're talking about this case. But unfortunately, we do have to kind of dig in to the deeper side of things, too. And one of the reasons that we're talking about the story at all today is because this is

a love triangle, allegedly, that went wrong. And this is something we talk about here, kind of a lot on crime, whether it's two guys versus one girl or two girls fighting over one guy, whatever that may be. But here's an added layer to this. In this case, they were teenagers at the time in high school. So right away, I'm thinking, okay, their frontal lobe isn't quite completely developed because they're still kids, then they're fighting in this love triangle. I guess what are your initial thoughts about all that? Unfortunately, we're seeing a lot more of this in the media, but I think we're seeing more in society of teen-on-teen type of violence. And whether that's related to other issues of video games or media or just a lack of general

empathy for human life in that particular generation, that's for sociologists and psychologists to determine. But there's certainly an increase in it, and it's very scary. As a parent, it's scary. And as a member of society, it's scary. I think it's something we have to pay attention to. There's kind of a lot going on in this case because we have three defendants, two who recently took a plea deal and then a third.

So let's start with the first two. There's some evidence against them that I would like to talk about. To start is incriminating texts. And this isn't to say that other defendants don't have these. I know that we've covered adults who have sent incriminating texts or incriminating Google searches, but these are teenagers, so I'm wondering if that may correlate. And I just wanted to read some of the texts that they allegedly wrote, quote, Murder will definitely happen soon.

A different text, quote, it'll be bloody. And then a third text, quote, help me kill him. So we know these two girls now women ended up taking a plea deal, but could these incriminating texts have been really bad for them, had they not? I mean, we do see the situation where there are text messages

and there are very much damaging evidence against defendants. And that's the job of their attorney is to let them know just how bad that evidence is against them. And so in situations like this, it appears that the two young females that pled, they probably got legal advice telling them the evidence is bad against them. And so unfortunately, we're seeing a lot of this, though, in teenage crimes, whether it's text messages, Facebook, Snapchat, we're seeing a lot of times where teenagers, to your point earlier, their frontal lobes not developed yet. They're not thinking about the situation and whether or not they could get away with it. They just don't quite grasp that concept.

And I think that's one of the reasons why we see so many prosecutions and plea deals in teenage cases as well. Do you think it's possible that these kids, because at the time of the crime, they were children under age 18, that they just weren't thinking that this would be investigated or that they would be caught? Because to what you were talking about before, we've covered many stories where there are videos or photos that are on Snapchat, that these kids are often thinking, oh, it'll just delete, you know, on Snapchat, it goes away. or nobody's going to be able to read my texts. I mean, do you think that's why they're being so blatant in this? Well, as adults, we probably all remember being teenagers and just thinking, that won't happen to me. I'll be able to get away with it.

And I do think there's an aspect of that of where the understanding of consequences and the understanding of evidence just doesn't compute with teenagers. And they think that they're going to be able to get away with it. And normally they're wrong. They don't get away with it. So we've got those.

incriminating texts that are pretty blatant, kind of in black and white. I mean, they even say murder. But putting those aside, let's say that the defense somehow comes up with an argument. We can't prove who wrote them. We can't prove who read them, all of that. Let's say that it's really strong. There's also eyewitness testimony that puts the defendants at the scene carrying a body right by the murder scene. I mean, I know eyewitness testimony isn't 100% all of the time. But that's pretty big evidence against them, right? I would agree. As a former police officer, as well as now attorney, I would certainly feel pretty good about my case when you have eyewitness testimony on top of kind of circumstantial evidence with the text messages.

It feels like a strong case just from what we know in the public, much less what the prosecutors know that's not public. So these two girls, now women, I keep saying girls because they were girls at the time of the crime, but they have since turned over age 18. So now These two women took a plea deal. We talked about the mountain of evidence against them. Do you think that was the right move for them to take this deal? Without knowing all the evidence against them, it's hard to say whether that was the right move for them.

I can tell you that the specific plea deal, to my understanding, was 25 years. And in Florida, the way the law works is if you were charged with a capital murder or a murder charge and you're under the age of 18 at the time of that, going to get an automatic review at 25 years to determine whether or not you should stay in jail for a longer period of time. So I imagine that was something that was worked out with the prosecutor's office where the prosecutor may have been anticipating they would get out at 25 years. So they went ahead and just went forward with that, you know, with that process of saying, okay, let's just get 25. And there probably was some type of deal. I would imagine they may be

testifying against the defendant that's going to be going to trial soon. That moves right into my next point because these two women now have been convicted of the crime. They're going to be serving their 25-year sentence and then 10 years probation after that. But they aren't out of the limelight for long because the other defendant in the case did not take a plea deal. He's pleaded not guilty and he plans to go to trial early next year. Now these two women who we already talked about, they had this boatload of evidence against them and now they're going to be witnesses against this other defendant. I mean, is that pretty stark for the prosecution to bring forward this? They can talk about what led up to the murder, what happened?

during, what happened after? What are you thinking? It's certainly helpful for the prosecution. There's no doubt about that. You have this evidence and you have witnesses that were a part of the crime that are now going to be testifying against the sole defendant that did not plea out and wants to go to trial. And my understanding, I believe on top of that is this defendant, who's now an adult, is wanting to represent himself. And I'm sure the court's going to have some special circumstances they're going to have to do with by having a standby attorney for this defendant, especially given his age, but I would expect the prosecution's feeling pretty good about their case right now.

Yeah, as you mentioned, this defendant will be representing himself pro se. So he does have kind of standby defense attorneys there kind of overseeing it, at least it sounds like, but he will be representing himself. And I mean, I just really have to question this because let's say that he is a veteran attorney that he's practiced for many years. He's gone to trial multiple times. I mean, even all of that information, if your life is on the line here, you've got to have some sort of emotion involved. Plus, this kid is young, and by all accounts, I don't believe that he is a practicing attorney. So what's that going to look like when it comes time for trial? Well, the way the court system works is even if you represent yourself,

the court still has to treat you as though you have the same knowledge as the other attorney. So it's, in my opinion, it's a big mistake, especially when your life is on the line. General rule, no attorney ever wants to represent themselves in a case that has heavy implications, especially such as this. So I certainly think it's a mistake. I think the judge is going to have to be very careful because of the nature of these charges and the automatic appeals that may come through that. It's a tough situation for a young man who's probably making some bad decisions and has already made a lot of bad decisions. But making a decision to represent himself, I think we'll probably make the prosecution's job even easier. I think another interesting aspect of this, too, is that we've already talked about the prosecution's two-star witnesses, these other defendants who've been convicted in this murder.

But now this defendant representing himself, is it possible that he would then cross-examine these two women he used to be friends with and allegedly committed the crime with? Yes, he has a right to confront his accusers. So it is possible that he would be cross-examining them. And we've seen this in other high-profile cases where a defendant would cross-examine even children, unfortunately. But that is a part of our adversarial system, and he has that right to face his accusers. You talked about appeals earlier. So I want to bring it back to that because obviously that's something with almost any case

that we want to talk about. And I just had a question here, a thought. Is it possible that let's say he's convicted? and then would go on to appeal. Could he mention ineffective counsel when he was his own counsel? That's where it's very important for the judge to make sure the defendant understands, and I'm sure the judge has already done this multiple times, understands the ramifications of representing himself.

I don't believe that ineffective assistance of counsel is going to be available if he fully does represent himself through this simply because he is his own counsel and he's made that choice. If he does start to rely maybe on the standby counsel, there may be a slight argument there, but I would imagine other areas of appeal are probably something that would be looked at versus that. So we've talked about how this is likely an uphill battle for this defendant who will be representing himself. But we have seen already he's doing some work. He filed a motion.

So he has a couple of charges against him right now. And he filed a motion to dismiss one of them, which is conspiracy to commit murder. What do you think about that? Do you think the judge might let that one slide and actually dismiss it? I would have to know a lot more about the case in terms of the extreme details to know what the judge was likely to do. There's different elements to every crime. And so when a defendant moves to dismiss a charge, they've got to show the judge that the prosecution doesn't have any evidence to prove it and all of those elements. And some other factors that come into that. So the judge is certainly going to have to entertain it because that's the judge's job. if it was timely filed, the judge would have to entertain it. But the defendant has a heavy burden

to be able to dismiss that, especially when the defendant is not a trained attorney. Any way you spin it, this is going to be one. We'll definitely want to keep tabs on and see what happens down the line. But Matt, thank you so much for joining us today and kind of breaking down what we know so far. Absolutely. And I can tell you that my heart and the hearts, as your listeners know, I'm the president of the Tristan Bailey Foundation and I've represented that family for some time. Their hearts go out to DJ's family and the entire community that's hurting down in Miramar. Thank you for reminding us the importance of this story and keeping DJ's memory alive.

Absolutely. Thanks for having us. Clements's case is expected to go to trial in January, so more updates to come in the new year. We'll follow that on Sidebar and the one and only Jesse Weber will bring you the latest. That's it for today, but make sure to subscribe. You can follow us on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or anywhere you listen. I'm Sierra Gillespie, and this has been Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. Apple Podcasts or Spotify.