i feel bad about what happened to the little girl. i feel like maybe that day, she might still be here. i'm a father myself. so i understand. >> one of the men involved in a gun battle in a miami housing project that took the life of a 9-year-old girl tells why he decided to plead guilty and tells who it is that started that gun battle. this man, damon darling. prosecutors say he started it, he had the ak-47 that took the life of the 9-year-old. more live testimony today as "in session" takes you "courtside."

good thursday morning to all of you. i'm jack ford. welcome to "courtside" where you get to hear both sides of every case. they're getting ready to start more live testimony in this courtroom in miami, florida. it gives us a chance to check in with beth karas who is covering the trial for us live. first question to you, originally the plan was to get started about an hour ago. this morning apparently that didn't happen. any idea why? >> yes. the assistant state attorney monica gordo informed the court that their next witness sam brown isn't around. they're out looking for him. he does have some health problems. they do think it is health related rather than another witness being recalcitrant or threatened. and he witnessed parts of the

shooting and says there were actually three people shooting. so hopefully they have until 2:00 to locate mr. brown and to bring him to court. a police officer is about to take the stand. they really need mr. brown, though, to go forward with the rest of their witnesses. he sets the scene. this next officer will be jerry marquez who arrested damon darling on july 20th. >> thank you so much for getting us started here. you'll stand by. beth continuing her coverage. we're inside the courtroom. that same witness that beth talked about just taking the witness stand. >> employed by the miami-dade police department. >> you're with the miami-dade police department? >> yes, ma'am. >> that's different than the city of miami police department? >> yes. >> miami-dade police department is the county department, is that correct? >> yes, county wide. >> what do you do for them? >> at the current moment i'm assigned to the neighborhood resource unit, which is in -- which is out of the north side district.

>> how long have you been with the miami-dade police department? >> approximately four years. >> were you employed in police work before that? >> no. and when you first came on to the police department, were you always associated with the unit that you're associated with now? >> no. >> i'm going to take you back now to 2006. specifically july. were you employed with the police department at that time? >> yes. >> and were you assigned to a special unit? >> no. >> were you in uniform? >> yes. >> and tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what that means. when you're in uniform, what do you have? >> the uniformed patrol officer you are to respond to calls for service and when you're not on a call for service, you are to be proactive to deter crime. >> and do you wear regular clothes or do you wear a uniform? >> it's a uniform. >> what's miami-dade's uniform look like? >> light brown shirt with darker

brown pants with the stripe down the side of the brown pants. >> and do you drive a marked unit or unmarked unit? >> marked police car. >> do you have -- did you have a partner back at that time? >> yes. >> who is your partner? >> officer owens. >> we are here today on this trial in a homicide that occurred july 1st, 2006. the victim in that case is sherdavia jenkins. you didn't have any involvement with that investigation, is that correct? >> correct. >> your involvement came actually on july 20th, 2006, correct? >> yes. >> now on that date, were you working? >> say that again. >> on that date, were you working? >> yes. >> and what was your area of work that day? >> my area of work was the north

side district, which at that time we had area four, which is from -- i think it's like 75th street northwest all the way down to 220 street. north and west goes out to east and west avenue on the west side. >> and you had a partner. >> yes. >> and his name was -- >> fabian owens. >> and did you ride together in the same police unit? >> off and on periodically. >> or would you drive in separate units? >> yes. >> on that date do you remember if you were riding together? >> we were riding together. >> now, what time was your shift ta day? >> midnight. >> so midnight to 8:00? >> yes. >> when -- before you started your shift do you have a role call? >> yes. >> do they give you information at roll call for thins to look for while you're out there on

the street? >> yeah, they do. >> and what types of things do they tell you. >> sometimes they go around from other annes that are disseminated and just in case, be on the lookout for this person or that person. >> so you'll actually get a flyer like a piece of paper? >> yeah, times a flyer or sometimes during the process they might not have a subject identified. so the subject is unknown. >> will you sometimes get the descriptions? >> yes. >> and when you say be on the lookout, that's long for a bolo, correct? >> correct. >> sometimes you're told about cars as well as people. >> yes, ma'am. >> on that particular day, did you -- when you went to roll call initially, were you told about anybody to look for? >> no. >> so you went out on your patrol, correct? >> yes. >> did you come into contact with some people that were gambling? >> yes.

>> and tell us how that came about. >> we were on routine patrol, myself and officer owens, which is my partner. and there were a group of individuals gambling in the lincolnfield project area. we just pretty much told them, hey, guys, go in. you know, close it up. they pretty much said okay, officer. and they wrapped it up. >> were these people adults, juveniles? >> kind of a mixture but i think mainly younger aged juveniles. >> so it wasn't your intent to arrest anybody at that point. you just wanted them to move on. >> yes. >> now, you just mentioned lincoln fields project. do you know what area that project is in? >> lincoln fields is from 21st avenue to 19th avenue northwest, and from 62nd street to, i believe it's 71st or 69th

street. >> and basically a residential area. >> yes. >> apartment basically linged apartments. >> correct. >> that's different than the liberty square project, is that true? >> yes. >> so your area involves lincoln fields, not liberty square. >> correct. >> now, did you notice anyone in particular -- did anyone draw your attention when you broke up this first gambling group? >> yes. >> and what was that? >> it was a male. he was on the beach cruiser type bicycle. >> everybody else was on foot? >> yeah, pretty. . because i think they lived inside the project housing area. >> so what did this person on the bicycle do? >> he got on his bike and drove off. >> casual? >> yeah. >> white male, black male? >> light skinned black male. >> did there come a time when

you found out later on that there was someone that might have been in that group that you needed to pay attention to? >> yes. >> how did that come about? >> through sergeant gil williams. and did he come find you? did you all report to him? >> he called up from the other location. >> when you say we, how many of you? >> i think it was about seven or eight of us, from six to eight officers. >> who were all assigned to duty that night in the northwest area, right? >> yes. >> the -- what did sergeant williams tell you? >> he relayed some information to us that a wanted subject that was wanted by the city was playing -- was gambling in the lincoln field projects. >> now, this would be a person that was wanted not by your agency, miami-dade police

department, but by the city of miami, correct? >> yes. >> but you all exchange information. >> correct. >> did he give you a description of the person? >> yes. >> and what was the description? >> wearing a long sleeve camouflage type shirt. (announcer) listening to you. it's how we save you money nationwide insurance. my name is sandy garza and i am on your side.

only nationwide gives you an on your side review. you tell us about your life and your insurance. sometimes you don't have enough coverage. or you may even have too much. we'll let you know. we listen and build you a custom policy of just the coverage you need at the right price for you. (announcer) only a nationwide insurance agent can give you an on your side review. call this number to save up to $523. we take a look at the policy and look to see if there's any gaps in coverage. you know, in addition, we talk about discounts that are available. and we try to save you money. i mean we really do. (anncr:) call this number now or call a local agent. switch today and save up to $523. listening and saving you money is how... ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪

we are back "courtside." let me make quick introduction of our guests before we jump back in the courtroom. jennifer detommaso. and also a former bronx prosecutor, criminal defense attorney in private practice. they'll spend time with us this afternoon. inside the courtroom, officer jerry marquez on the witness stand being questioned, talking about the arrest that was made back on july 20th a couple of weeks after this shooting. they got a message that he might be involved in gambling in this area. they came looking for him. he's talking about coming up on the scene of a number of parties indeed engaged in gambling. >> damon darling.

>> did you know his name at this time? >> no. >> is this a person that you previously described by clothing? >> yes. >> or that was described to you by clothing? >> yes. >> was he wearing those clothes that were described to you? >> yes. >> and what were those clothes again? >> a long sleeve type army fatigue shirt, like khaki-ish and blue jeans and timberland boots. >> so you continued to go after him. >> correct. >> do you see the person that you began to follow that night in court today? >> yes. >> would you point him out? >> gentleman having on a black suit, blue tie and looks like a lightest blue or white shirt. >> record reflect the witness has identified the defendant in this case, damon darling. so you began to follow him. was he walking? >> no. >> okay. what was he doing? >> running. >> so what were you doing? >> running.

>> and how fast -- tell us what happened as you ran after him. >> as i'm running behind him, saying, "stop police. police." he continues to run from me, kind of like, i guess like throw some moves to shake me. but i guess his boots were too baggy or big and he stumbled and fell and i fell on top of him. >> okay. so you apprehended him. >> correct. >> at that point, when you fell on top of him, did you take him into custody? >> yes. >> did you handcuff him at that point? >> yes. >> and did he make any statements to you at that point? >> he was -- i don't know. he just ran. i don't recall all what he was is a iing b i don't recall anything in particular. >> did you notice any of the other officers that you were there with that you had him in

custody? >> owens was like on the radio. but i did. >> what did you do next? >> he was escorted back to the police vehicle by officer owens and myself. >> what's your protocol. what were you supposed to do at that point? >> from there, this was pretty much he was under arrest. i was trying to get his name out of him. and i asked him his name. and he gave me the name of deandre hartfield. >> and did you ask him to do anything or give you any help with that name? >> yes. >> what did you do? >> i asked him how do you spell it? and he was telling me -- he said

d-e -- and i forgot how he actually spelled it. i was looking at him and saying, that doesn't say dee andre. i said try again. he was like, man, d-e. i don't know if he was nervous or what, he couldn't really spell the name he provided. >> did there come a time at a later time that you knew that that was not his name? >> yes. >> how did that come about? >> in the licensing system for the dmv when i pulled up a picture of the individual, the guy didn't really resemble him that much. >> now, did you do that back a the office or did you do it in your car? >> in the car. >> so you had the capability of running someone's identification in your car? >> yes. >> now, once he realized that you thought that he wasn't giving you a correct name, did he make any statements to you? >> he was like, okay, you got

me. >> how did you find out what his real name was? >> he was transported over to the miami-dade police department, fingerprinted in the i.d. section where hee he was fingerprinted, and his identity was revealed. >> it was revealed to be damon darling. >> yes. >> did you all notify anyone at that point? >> yes. >> who do you notify? >> we notified the city of miami police department homicide unit. >> because they're the people that wanted to speak to him, correct? >> correct. >> was he in fact turned over to them in. >> yes. he was taken upstairs. he was sat in the interview room and waited there till the detectives arrived. >> this is at the miami-dade police department headquarters over at doral? >> yes. >> did you have anything further to do with the case at that

point? >> no. >> do you even know if the city of miami police officers, detectives, arrived? >> i don't recall if we waited for them or what, but yeah, i think we waited. because we wrote a report of them for our involvement and we turned it over to them. >> but nothing further after that? >> no. >> thank you, sir. >> you're welcome. >> cross-examination. >> thank you. >> good morning, officer. >> good morning. >> did you -- you played football a few years ago? >> not really. >> you mentioned that damon tried to give you some moves. >> yes. >> they weren't successful. >> no. >> he fell. >> correct. >> you fell on top of him. >> correct. >> at that point, he didn't give you a hard time, right, he cooperated. >> yes. >> picked him up, dust yourself off and you walk him back to your car. >> yes. >> after that -- actually,

probably right there, you patted him down, right? >> yeah. >> make sure no weapons, right? >> correct. >> make sure nothing illegal. >> yes. >> and there were no weapons. >> correct. >> nothing illegal. >> correct. >> he was of no threat to you? >> no. >> brought him back to the car, ran the identification, brought him back to the station. >> yes. >> that was july 20th, 2006. >> correct. >> as far as the incident date of july 1st, 2006 when the innocent girl was killed, you can't tell the jury anything about that. >> no. >> you can't tell the jury the fact of who or what bullet killed her? >> correct. >> you can't tell them who was acting in self-defense. >> yes. >> yes, you can or no you can't. >> no, i cannot. >> thank you, sir. >> you're welcome. >> any redirect on that? >> no. >> all right, sir, you are excused at this time. thank you.

>> may i see the lawyers just for a moment, please? >> all right, so another witness on the stand moving fairly quickly with some of these witnesses. as you can see, the prosecution took him through the apprehension of this defendant, damon darling. then he said quite can kidly, he had nothing to do with the earlier investigation into the death of the-year-old girl, his function, he made the arrest, he brought him in. some very quick cross-examination by the defense here. what they've been doing with a couple of witnesses, reinforcing that they really don't have anything to do, have any knowledge about the central issue, which is who was it that fired first outside of that home, that housing project back in july of 2006. judge said they want to talk a little bit about what the next scheduling is going to be. apparently they've resolved that. >> ladies and gentlemen, i have some good news for you, actually, that we're going to

take a very early lunch break. if you're hungry, that's good news. if you are like me, you didn't have breakfast, that's really good news. okay? please leave your pens and your pads at your seat. now, not only is this going to be an early lunch, it's going to be a little longer lunch, which also may be good news for all of you. we're going to return at 2:00 today. 2:00. so it is a nice, long leisurely lunch. when you return, you can go about your business -- when you return, if you leave the courthouse, you return, go to jury pool area. that's where you will meet again like when you got here this morning. you'll meet the bailiff and they'll take you back over here to the jury room when we're close to being ready for you. please during this extended lunch break, no independent

research, don't go to any of the places that you've heard about during the course of the testimony. don't discuss the case with anyone or amongst yourselves. so let anyone speak to you about the case. if anyone tries to speak with you, tell them you're on the jury. you cannot speak with them. if anyone should persist, please report that to the bailiff. if you should hear anyone speaking about the case, walk away. don't pay attention. all right? and if you would, please, again, return promptly -- and i would be at the jury pool area by 10 to 2:00 so that we can start at 2:00. this afternoon. all right. so leave your notepads and pens there. and you're excused for lunch. >> all rise for the jury. >> so what we're seeing is they're taking a longer lunch break. apparently this has something to do with one of the witnesses they're waiting for, a man by

the name of sam brown, who according to earlier testimony had been something of an eyewitness, had identified having seen three people outside in the area where the shooting took place, identified one as having an ak-47, the other having a handgun. clearly important testimony for the prosecution here and apparently some question about where this witness is right now. the judge has said we're going to send the jury out for a longer break than usual while they're looking for the witness. while they're doing that and nothing going on inned the courtroom, gives us a chance to talk with our guests. all right. both of you guys have been prosecutors. all of us, actually, here have been prosecutors. i suspect you've had the same situation i've had, you're ready to go and you can't find a witness. jennifer, you first, what do you do? what are they doing right now trying to find this guy? >> i suspect that they have their lead detectives combing the streets and the area, calling all phones, all their friends, all their neighbors looking for this witness. if the witness is reluctant, i

don't know why they didn't have this witness in a hotel last night if they knew this was a reluctant witness. i'm sure they're doing everything they can. if this were me, i would move forward with my next witness. this does not make the jury happy. >> the other day that jurors listened to 25 minutes of opening statements, then they broke for two hours, you understand that there are always problems. we're sympathetic to people lining up their witnesses. but at some point in time you got to worry that the jury's going to start getting really annoyed. they're taking up all of their time and they're not hearing testimony. >> with jennifer, i don't think you've encountered this situation. when you have a critical witness, you know you're having that witness ensconced someplace ready to go. >> this witness has showed up all times before, to testify in the other hearing. you would like to think that you have some witnesses backed up and ready to go. >> this is a hiccup in the trial here, probably won't have any

impact later on. but it does not look good. you want to look like you're well prepared to present the case to the jury. when you have this type of interruption even though it's probably not explained to the jury, you get a sense that maybe the prosecution's case isn't as solid as they were led to believe. >> surprised by seeing the very brief rocross-examination by th defense here. you weren't there the night of the shooting, were you? >> not surprised at all. because the arresting really wasn't there and really has nothing to tell the jurors except that he arrested this man. the prosecution, i think could have done a little more with the flight, that he ran, what was he running from, gambling. in miami-dade, you can run all you want, you can put your hands behind your back for gambling in miami. >> certainly that's something you would expect him to say. the closing, jumping on that. why would you run unless there's

something else going on. >> i was very curious what the defense attorney was going to do. i thought it was well to leave that alone and no questions. you know what your defense is here. you're not going to get anything with this guy. why open the door to something negative? but he did fine. effective as far as it went. >> as a defense attorney, i'm sure that it was, and good prosecutor inside. this is not a good guy. he's got prior convictions here. gambling. you won't invite him into your home for tea. but according to the defense, he's not a killer. he's not the one opening up with the ak-47. they're taking a break. we'll take a break ourselves. come back and talk a little bit because there were some significant issues taking place inside that courtroom yesterday. including an eyewitness who comes in the courtroom yesterday and is no longer an eyewitness. now doesn't remember seeing any of the things she said before, including identification of this defendant as being the first one to open fire.

we'll look into all of that. we want to know what you would say.

when you pick up the gun, can you show us what you mean by that? >> the assault rifle. i threw my hands up when he pointed the gun at me. >> why did you throw your hands up? >> because he was pointing the gun at me. >> were you afraid? >> i wasn't really like terrified that he was going to kill me. i thought he was going to rob me or something. >> that's the testimony by a man who had been a co-defendant in this case. leroy lerose. he did testify against damon darling. they're outen a quick break -- not so quick break but a break. beth karas, it gives us a chance to get caught up because it was

indeed a very busy day. let me go through a series of things here with you, if i can. earlier in the day, apparently a problem with somebody who been in the courtroom, some either a family or a friend of somebody of the defendant and there was an incident. and as a consequence, they were thrown out of the courtroom. what was that? >> yes, that happened yesterday afternoon. it was a woman on damon darling's side of the courtroom. i did ask the defense attorney today if it was a relative, friend, who it was, and he didn't know. but it was a woman on the darling side. she had mean monica gordo, the lead prosecutor in the hallway, she had flipped her the finger and called her a bitch. monica gordo reported that to the court. the judge was very upset. temperatures are kind of hot in the courtroom on the darling side of the courtroom. not against the jenkins family, necessarily. but they're just upset about some of the witnesses apparently who are testifying against damon darling.

so the judge did have that woman removed for the rest of the trial. and threatened jail as contempt of court if anyone violates the court decorum order. >> an interesting development with regard to a prosecution witness, a woman who had testified before, who had lived in the vicinity of this shooting, had been fairly specific in earlier testimony, gets into the courtroom yesterday and it becomes a problem. in a minute or so, i want to show a couple of bites of what her testimony was, but why don't you set the stage for us first, if you will. explain to us what her concerns were, and then how this all played out inside of the courtroom. >> she always was concerned about cooperating with the police, but she knew the jenkins family. she knew little sherdavia. sherdavia knocked on her door almost directly across the way from the jenkins apartment is where this woman lived with her children and husband.

sherdavia wanted her own little girl to go out and play today but the witness said no. she saw parts of this altercation and heard all of it. she was in her second floor bedroom. and it will the floor when the shots were fired. now, she has testified in the path but never in front of a jury. she testified a week and a half ago at a hearing in this case and she gave a sworn deposition sta statement in anticipation of trial. she said damon darling was the one to shoot first. yesterday, she was so scared -- she was terrified. she was terrified of the camera, but one has to wonder if it was really the camera or if it was the darling side of the courtroom with damon darling's family and friends and supporters that were really intimidating her. she did not want to testify with the camera. the judge said, you have to. you don't come within the statute that would allow protection off camera. she sort of twisted her body away from the jury and had her

head down and bowed. and her hair would hang down in front of her face. there were times she had to look towards the jury to identify from a photograph and where her windows were and what she could see. so jurors and people knew who she was and could see her face. she's not protected from the folks in the community who were in the courtroom watching, but she was really reticent to say again that damon darling was the first to fire. in fact, he refused to say it yesterday. >> we had made the decision in consideration of her concerns, when we've been showing her testimony, we're not showing her face, have not mentioned her name at all. as you said, the judge said under the law in the state of florida, she was compelled to come forward and to testify. and i want to play a portion of that testimony where, as you mentioned, she was asked again about who it was that had fired first. remembering that she had answered this question before in the hearing and also in the deposition saying it was damon darling. now watch what happens when she's asked this question yesterday in the courtroom.

>> i don't recall. i don't remember. >> who fired first? >> i don't know who fired first. >> you can't even tell the jury who took the gun out first? >> no, i can't bncht you are sure you saw yellow man with a gun in his hands. >> yes. >> that's what she said when she was questioned about the defense here, the cross-examination. she was questioned a little bit earlier by the prosecution also about that whole issue, about who it was that had fired first, what it was that she had said in the past. so let's take a look at this again. she's being questioned by prosecutor kathleen hoch and questioned about what she had said in the past with regard to this issue. watch this. >> do you recall giving a deposition on may 8th, 2008 -- >> it's been a while, like i said. >> i understand. i understand. and do you recall testifying that red rock opened fire, then yellow man. >> like i said, it's been a while. i don't remember if i said that or not. it's been a while. a lot has happened in my life

so -- >> but if you said that back then, it would have been the truth, wouldn't it? >> like i said, it's been a while. it's been a while. this happened -- it's been a while. >> so beth, the exchange that we just watched, prosecutor kathleen hoch reminding her of what he said in the past, red rock, the street name for damon darling, that opened fire first, was that all played out in front of the jury? >> what she just said now was in front of the jury. and her prior statement was incorporated in subsequent questions so the jury knows what she said before, isn't it true that you testified. and yousy it was a long time ago, the prosecutor, approximately a week ago that it was red rock who fired first. and so she did concede that she had said that before. so it's out there for the prosecution to use ultimately. >> certainly if you're the prosecutor, you wanted to make

sure that the jurors have heard that she said something specific and definitive in the past saying it was this defendant that was the one who opened fire first. beth, there was also some drama inside the courtroom because the other man involved in that shooting, the other co-defendant, leroy lerose took the stand yesterday. viewers might just be joining us. what was it, what did he plead to, what was the agreement he agreed to that brought him into this courtroom yesterday? >> two weeks ago leroy lerose pled guilty to the charge, second degree murder. and he took a seven-year sentence. he's already done almost half of it, three years, he's been incarcerated since 2006, then ten years probation. it is not clear if that deal was cut so he would become a witness for the prosecution. the prosecution's proof against hip was getting slimmer because

a witness recently recanted her statement. she was the key witness against lerose, said she saw him with gun out saying everybody, move, because i'm going to shoot this -- and he used an exmettive. but shoot this place up. she recanted that. she happens to be a relative of damon darling. they didn't have a credible witness to put that statement in leroy larose's mouth. no one else heard it. it wasn't larose always maintain head fired in self-defense. he passed two polygraphs. he even said when he pled to the pretty good deal, he did it maintaining that he didn't do anything wrong, he didn't provoke the situation. he said, i feel like if i didn't go to that neighborhood to buy marijuana that day, weed is the word he uses, maybe this girl would be alive today. i'm a parent myself. i don't know what i would have done if it happened to me.

i can see my child one day. they can never see there their child. he took the plea and he said he knows that he has something to do with it. because his presence there, he believes provoked damon darling. >> beth, that's a pivotal figure inside this court for this prosecution. i'll ask you to stand by. because i want to show you some of that testimony. beth set the stage nicely for you, who this person is, what his involvement was, what the deal was that he agreed to that then ultimately allows him to come into the courtroom. prosecutor monica gordo is doing the questioning. leroy larose gets on the stand, starting to talk. >> where do you currently live? >> i'm housed at stockade facility. >> is that jail? >> yes. >> do you remember july 1st, 2006? >> yes. >> taking you back to that time, who were you living with? >> i was living with my girlfriend, one of my sons and my expected son, newborn. >> how many children do you have?

>> four. >> at that time, how many children k you have? >> three, and one on the way. >> back in july of 2006, how far along was your girlfriend pregnant? >> she was two days away from having a scheduled c-section. >> did you live in the liberty square housing project? >> no. >> did you have a job? >> yes. >> how many jobs did you have? >> two. >> what were your jobs. >> doing stocking at walmart and construction. >> what times of the day did you work? >> the "a" and "c" shift. >> can you tell us about that. what did you used to do at your job. >> stocking at walmart in the produce section, meat section. and building store fronts, aluminum store fronts. >> why were you working two jobs? >> because my girlfriend was on maternity leave. >> she'd already started her maternity leave? >> yes. >> taking you back not july 1st but about two months prior, did an incident occur to you? >> yes. >> what incident was that? >> i was driving down the

street. someone pulled up beside me and shot two rounds in car. >> what car were you driving? >> gray honda accord with some rims on it, dark tint. >> and whose car was that? >> it is registered to my girlfriend. >> was that a car that you normally drove? >> yes. >> who else had access to that car? >> my girlfriend, family members. >> did friends and family often sit in that car to be transported places? >> yes. >> what time of day were you shot at two months prior to the incident we're here for today? >> like 8:00, 9:00 at night. >> and where were you driving? >> on 17th avenue and 59th street. >> is that fairly close to the area where this shooting happened? >> yes. >> when you're shot at, do you see who's shooting at u? >> no. >> what do you do? >> i see a car pulling off.

>> what color was it. >> burgundy, black. a dark colored car. >> when the shots are fired, are you struck? >> yes. >> where? >> in my shoulder. >> can you show the members of the jury where you were shot. you're pointing to an area on your upper left arm. >> yes. >> this is where you were shot two months prior to the incident that we're here for today. >> yes. >> you can go ahead and have a seat. when you were shot, did you see what happened to the bullet that went through your arm? >> yes. it was lost on the other side of the passenger side. >> i'm showing you what's been marked as exhibit 71 and 76 in this case. do you recognize these? >> yes.

>> what are they? >> the inside of my car. >> was that there prior to the day you were shot in the arm? >> no. >> and is this where the bullet lodged after it hit you in the arm? >> yes. and again, this the two months prior to the shooting that occurred in this case. >> yes. >> when you were shot that time, where did you go after wards? >> i went to the hospital. >> were you treated? >> yes. >> as a result of that shooting, did you do anything?

>> yes. >> what? >> i went to purchase a firearm. >> why did you purchase a firearm? >> for protection. >> did you carry that firearm? >> only when i went to the liberty city area. >> why when you went to that area? >> because that's the place where i was shot the first time. >> what type of gun did you purchase? >> a .44. >> a .44 what? >> revolver. >> and when you say revolver, can you describe it? >> yeah. like a round cylinder, snub nose, black and brown color. >> how many shots can that revolver fire? >> six. >> did it have any extra magazines or ability to fire more bullets. >> no. >> did it have any extra equipment that allowed it to add more bullets without physically opening the chamber and putting them in? >> no.

>> where did you buy it? >> on the street. (announcer) listening to you.

it's how we save you money nationwide insurance. my name is sandy garza and i am on your side. only nationwide gives you an on your side review. you tell us about your life and your insurance. sometimes you don't have enough coverage. or you may even have too much. we'll let you know. we listen and build you a custom policy of just the coverage you need at the right price for you. (announcer) only a nationwide insurance agent can give you an on your side review. call this number to save up to $523. we take a look at the policy and look to see if there's any gaps in coverage. you know, in addition, we talk about discounts that are available. and we try to save you money. i mean we really do. (anncr:) call this number now or call a local agent. switch today and save up to $523. listening and saving you money is how... ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪

a gunman involved in the shooting that took a life of a 9-year-old.

when we left the courtroom just a few moments ago, leroy larose was testifying. it was later yesterday. probably didn't see it. he started to describe for the jurors, first of all, a run-in

he had with somebody he didn't know where he claim hess was shot. now we pick up with his testimony here. he's talking about arriving at the scene where the shooting took place that took the life of the-year-old girl. he's telling you why he went there and what happened when he arrived. >> july 1st, 2006. did there come a time when you go to the liberty square housing project. >> yes. >> why did you go there? >> to buy some weed. >> are you armed? >> yes, the .44. >> where do you have your firea firearm? >> my right pocket. >> why did you to that area again? >> to buy marijuana. >> what car were you driving. >> agree honda accord, with dark tints. >> is that the same car you were driving two months prior when you were shot at? >> yes

come close. do you recognize what i'm showing you? >> yes. >> for the record, i'm showing you state's exhibit 19. what is it? >> now, there's some markings on this exhibit, right? some black marker? and you have that out there, right? >> no. >> do you recognize the main streets here? >> yes. >> hold on one second. you're indicating to the streets at the top of the picture and a major large road.

>> once again. >> yes. >> go ahead and take your seat. now, as you walk west, are you walking on a walkway? >> yes.

>> did there come a time when a person says something to you. >> prior to that person saying something to you, what do you see? >> in a chair with that right beside them. >> so what did you think? >> [ bleep ] going to jail. >> why? >> because he's sitting out there in broad daylight with a gun.

>> details as to why he went there. buy some weed. then sees a guy sitting on a porch with an assault rifle in his hand. before we get a break in here with our guest jennifer dethomaso. and see a stark contrast. witness for the prosecution, former defendant. he's in a jumpsuit, he's shackled. we're saying this is awkward. trying to show with his hands shackled what's going on. the defendant obviously in jail also, but when he comes into the courtroom. he has a suit and tie on. why the difference? >> well, the defense is trying to -- is going to make hay on the witness here through one aspect, which is to challenge his testimony in a deal he made with the prosecution. i don't think it matters to the defense when he comes in in a suit or tie, whether he can make hay with that as well by claiming that the prosecution is trying to dress him up.

as far as the defense is concerned, yur trying to present him in the most innocent light possible. you won't have him there making his best presentation. whether that works or not in this case, i don't know. >> it can be cause for a mistrial for jurors to see a defendant in jail. >> this is who he is. he's a convicted murder. now you see him for what he is. he's testifying he's telling you what he did that day in the clothes he wears every day. the defendant on the other hand is innocent until proven guilty. and he's going to be viewed that

way by the jurors until -- >> that's a basic, fundamental concept. and to make sure viewers see him as much as possible in that light. and one of the important things is show him in a suit and tie, innocent until proven guilty. if he's found not guilty, he walks out. if he's found guilty, then he looks like this guy in the jumpsuit. >> one of the prosecution's best lines is we take our witnesses as we find him. we found this one in shackles and a jumpsuit. >> that's who he is, that's where we're at. we'll take a quick break her to show more of his testimony. a pivotal witness inside this courtroom.

breakfast and fresh in-room coffee. free high-speed internet access. our free best western rewards card. now you can get up to four times more. just stay any 2, 3, or 4 nights between september 13th and november 22nd and you can earn double, triple, or even quadruple points when you pay with your mastercard card. triple-a members can get even more. use your points for free nights, airline rewards, gift cards, and more. better values, best western. for details, visit bestwestern.com.

i feel bad about what happened to the little girl. i feel like maybe if i didn't go to buy weed that day with a gun, she might still be living.

i'm a father myself so i understand. >> 9-year-old girl shot is dead outside of her home. a shooter testifies and pleads guilty saying that darling opened fire first and he was the one shooting the ak-47 that took the life of that 9-year-old. testimony today as in session takes you "courtside." welcome back. i'm jack ford. we're continuing the coverage of this trial in miami, florida. they're in the midst of a lunch break. it's been an eventful few days since the opening statements got started on tuesday. it's been a terrible tragic story that's told inside of this courtroom. and you have to wonder how it could have happened. our beth karas takes a closer look.

>> it's not easy when you lose a loved one. especially in a senseless way like this. >> reporter: david jenkins' daughter was playing outside her home in a miami housing project when a gun battle erupted nearby. 9-year-old shfr jenkins was struck by a bullet from an ak-47. her death causing outrage in a neighborhood already riddled with violence. >> i'm asking everyone, if you know something, please come forward. take back your community. take it back before it's too far gone and too late. >> reporter: two men were charged with second-degree murder in the girl's death. prosecutors say he ro larose and damon darling were involved in the deadly shootout and it was darling, they claim, that fired the fatal shot. defense attorney jonathan melts claims his client shot in self defense. >> what are you supposed to do? if faced by a barrel of a gun,

you can run and get shot in the back. beg for your life or you can meet force with force. >> reporter: larose pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and agreed to testify against darling in exchange for only seven years behind bars. darling could face a life sentence if convicted. but for the parents of little sherdavia, that is little consolation. >> why you take my baby? she didn't do nothing wrong. she did not do nothing. >> and beth karas joins us live outside of that courthouse. so beth, they ended up taking a lunch break earlier than they usually do and extending it usually than they later do. do we have any idea why? >> reporter: yes, because the next witness the prosecution wanted to call, a civilian man in the neighborhood who saw the shooting, he says, named sam brown is unavailable. he has been available every day this week but today they're

looking for him. he does have health issues and assistants say the prosecutor thought it could be health related. she asked the court until 2:00 p.m. today to look for him, call him this afternoon. she didn't want to go forward with other civilian witnesses saying his testimony was critical for the remaining testimony. i guess of the civilians and others in the area. so hopefully they'll have him by 2:00. i haven't received any word about, you know, when's going on beyond that. she did call one police officer in the interim, the one who arrested darling on july 20th. he was processed the next day for the murder charge. he was arrested on a gambling charge initially. and so there we have it. a witness has been available for the first few days this week but not available right now anyway. the judge says she's what she's going to do at 2:00. the case has to go forward. we'll see. >> beth, what do we know of sam brown and the parameters of his testimony? why would he be so critical for the prosecution?

>> well, he also sees the shooting out there. he did testify at the hearing about ten days ago. he saw three shooters, by the way. he saw definitely two black men and a lighter skinned person. you know, these -- he used the term red skin for a lighter person. and, you know, the only two people arrested here but darling and larose said there was a second assault weapon out there even though there were no spent shell casings for a second weapon, a second assault weapon but he sees the firing. i can't recall because he's been inconsistent with some of the stams whether or not he saw who initiated but places people in places with guns consistent with the witnesses that see at least parts of the shooting. >> beth, as you have mentioneda number of witnesses said three people out there, including

larose and another person with a weapon. how then is the prosecution or what is the prosecution suggesting to the jurors? what are did physical facts to allow the jurors to say even if there were three people out there, it was damon darling who was the one with the ak-47 that was firing and it was his ak that basically took the life of the 9-year-old? >> reporter: okay. that's a really good question and i don't know that we all understand enough about the nuances of this evidence for me to answer that but it's my understanding that witnesses will say and larose, too, that damon darling stayed in the general vicinity of like the front porch of the house where he was at. if he did, there's a palm tree that is several feet in front of him that's two bullet holes from an ak straight through it. move those bullets killed sherdavia because they were going west to east, which is the

direction larose ran and the direction of the jenkins' apartment, darling was never where that tree was. there would have been another shooter. but i'm not sure that that's -- that it was a bullet that went through the tree that shot her. the bullet that shot her did have a damage. didn't exit her. an ak-47 would have gone in and out if it was a direct shot t. velocity had slowed down but if darling stayed in the vicinity of his porch or the house he had been at and shot straight east, then he could have got sherdavia and there were strike marks on the side of her house. i don't know that they'll be able to say exactly who fired it except that darling admits to possessing an ak. he says that it was given to him by jervis andrews. it was an assault weapon that was fired and killed sherdavia. the shot was fired in the

direction that darling was firing at larose. not the direction of larose firing at darling. so there is evidence that comes from his mouth, larose's mouth, as well as other witness that is will support that it was darling who did the shooting. i don't know. i don't know about a third person but they never did get a gun so -- >> yeah. it is fairly complicated. i think the way you explained it makes it easier to understand for us, beth. quick question for you here. we mentioned and you talked about damon darrelling with an ak-47. did he give any detailed statement or any -- answer any questions for the investigators after his arrest about this incident? >> reporter: yes. we are going do see that this afternoon. it was videotaped and the judge will have the courtroom set up for the videotape to be played. the lead detective may be on the stand this afternoon. doesn't cop fess. he says he was shot at and says

his friend gave him a chopper, street name for ak-47. and his friend also had a chopper. and he says larose, you know, fired first and he fired back. et cetera. we'll hear that statement. >> all right. that obviously will be very interesting. beth, stand by for a moment if you would for us, please. because we have been watching some of that testimony of le roy larose testimony and beth explained why he was there, what the agreement was. a critical witness, perhaps the critical witness for the prosecution. he's now picking up and explaining to the jurors what went on between himself and that man he saw on the porch with the ak-47. >> does there come a time when the person speaks to you? >> yes. >> what does he say? >> what are you doing back there, yo? >> describe what that person was wearing. >> he had on a hat, baseball cap, undershirt, some shorts and some brown timber laland boots. >> do you remember the boots? >> yes. >> why? >> probably because i liked them. >> did it seem strange to you a

person is wearing timberland boots in july? >> no. >> in miami. >> no. because it was hot. >> hot out? so the person say what is to you? >> what are you doing back there, yo? >> speak up for me. >> what are you doing back there, yo? >> and what if anything did you do? >> i didn't think he was talking. i looked behind me as i was walking because i thought he was talking to somebody behind me. >> did you see anybody behind you? >> no. >> what happened next? >> i kept walking. >> i can't hear you. >> he said it again. i kept walking. >> okay. i'm going to ask you to speak in that microphone and direct your answers to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury. >> okay. >> so then he said that again. what does he say the second time? >> what are you doing back there, yo? >> what do you respond? >> i threw up a weed sign like i was looking for weed. >> what happened next? >> he upped the gun on me. >> can you show us?

>> like point an assault rifle at me. >> could you describe the assault rifle? >> it was all black. >> and at the time he pointed the assault rifle at you, do you have your gun up? >> no. i threw my hands up. >> why? >> he was point ago gun at me. >> were you afraid? >> i wasn't like terrified he was going to kill me. i thought he was going to rob me or something. >> what do you do next? >> he asked me what was i doing back there. >> what do you say? >> i told him i was looking for weed and he said, no, yo, you're driving the gray honda with the rims on it. >> and when he says that, what happens? >> he said, am i supposed to be looking for him? i said, no, i'm looking for weed. i don't know what you're talking about. >> you guys are having a back and forth? >> right. >> as this discussion goes on, where is your firearm? >> in my pocket. >> where is his firearm? >> pointed at me. >> what happens next? >> that's when he told me, do i

have anything on me? told me to lift up the shirt. before i could move, he turned and looked to the side and looked to the other side and when i looked to the side and saw there was somebody else. >> okay. and you saw somebody else doing what? >> just standing by a pole. >> okay. and did you see anything else? that that person had? >> yes. >> what? >> assault rifle next to him. >> okay. so you saw a second person with an assault rifle in their hands? >> yes. >> you saw the person with the timberland boots in front of you pointing an assault rifle at you motionin motioning to that other people? >> no. >> before that, had he said yo yo yo in that direction? >> yes. as i was walking on the sidewalk. that's what made me look up at him again. >> i'm going to ask you to step off. now, does there come a point -- do you keep walking forward as he has the gun pointed at you?

>> no. i stopped. >> okay. >> threw my hands up. >> can you show the members of the jury where you were standing when that happened? >> i was standing by this area, like not passed the corner of this building but on this side -- stepped off the side of the sidewalk. >> and where's the person with the timberland boots standing? >> over here. >> right here? >> yeah. right off this porch in the grassy area. >> okay. so he's pointing an assault rifle at you. at what point do you see another person with a gun? >> when he looks over this way. and that's when i turned my head and looked. the other guy was going -- >> okay. you say the other guy's on there. point for the members of the jury where the other guy with the other assault rifle is. >> wait, wait. i can't hear you. >> on the other porch by the poles. >> now, i'm going to have you mark with blue since there's already black writing on this, okay. mark with blue where that second person with an assault rifle was standing. >> this porch.

>> put a "x" please and then put your initials there. okay. /y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y

my baby is playing. happy. and while everybody looking for this -- in your house, they didn't see my baby on the porch. just having a good time. >> the mother of the victim talking about that terrible tragedy, her child dying literally in her arms outside of their home back in july of 2006. so much testimony inside this courtroom about who these shooters were, what was happening at the time but jurors understandably don't get a chance to hear a lot about the victim in cases like this. well, our beth karas had a chance to sit down and talk with this little 9-year-old girl's grandmother and learn about who she was. let's watch. >> my granddaughter can tell you every day with correct and naming. sherdavia comes out of my mouth every day. i call her sherdavia. i call the boys sherdavia. it's -- it's just still a big

miss, a big void. >> reporter: shirley williams' granddaughter was 9 when she was hit by a stray bullet and died while fleeing into her home. sherdavia jenkins was a small girl with a big mind. from everything i heard, sherdavia was a really special little girl. >> real special. >> reporter: at her elementary school, jenkins scored at the top of her class winning spelling bees, academic honors, chess tournaments and citizenship awards. >> she enjoyed things that most little kids her age would not. she enjoyed reading. she was an expert chess player. she was an artist. >> reporter: in fact, says her family, jenkins wanted to pursue art as a career. >> just really talented. >> reporter: williams is hopeful community efforts help prevent more violence but the loss of this bright, little girl, she says, was just too big a price.

>> i have not been able to find the lesson in the tragedy. in my mind, i have not been able to find the good that's going to come out of it for a community. >> so that horrendous tragedy any time anybody is killed but certainly a little girl like this such promise, family involved, parents doing the right thing in terms of raising her and they end up with the 9-year-old dead. let's talk about what happened inside of the courtroom yesterday with our guest jennifer and jonathan. beth explained to us how here's a critical witness for the prosecution and an eyewitness, an uninvolved eyewitness saying in the earlier testimony, in the deposition given, she hears a shooting. looks out and specifically says, this defendant damon darling, the guy that opens fire first with the ak-47. that's the prosecution's case here a. significant part of it. all of that takes place a couple

of weeks ago most recently. shows up in the courtroom yesterday, doesn't want to be there. clearly as beth said terrified. doesn't want to testify and all of a sudden doesn't remember any of the details that she had testified to before. so jen, if you're the prosecutor, what do you do when that happens to you? >> well, i think you have to do what you saw the prosecutor do. you have to try to introduce the prior testimony as best you can in front of the jury. try and put that testimony in front of the jury. try and show the jury that this witness formally testified that she has seen this defendant be the one to open fire first. she's testified under oath and sworn to tell the truth. nothing but the truth, the whole truth and she said that it was the defendant who pulled the trigger first. and even, no, it can't be put in as evidence, the jury hears it and make an impact. however, i think it has to be done with an impact.

>> yeah. and jonathan, a lot of people might be sub prized by the fact what she said previously is not now evidence in this courtroom that she's pointing her finger to damon darling. wasn't a situation where she said, you know, i can't really remember back then. the prosecutor refreshes the recollection. she said, oh yeah, it was him. basically she is saying if that's what i said, i don't remember. long time ago. i don't remember. why -- let's keep this sort of simple as we can. why is that not direct evidence against him? >> well, as critical as this testimony is, what is more critical for the defense is the instruction the judge give it is jury on how you use this -- >> right. >> -- evidence of prior statement that contradicts her testimony and you can't use that as evidence in chief. it's her testimony that testifies. >> what she said on the stand. she says, i don't remember. >> she's disavowed it. i would as defense have objected

to them hearing that prior statement. >> let's do this outside the presence of the jury and saying i don't remember, why should they hear this? here's a scenario for me. for the two of you, tell me if you agree with me. i'm the prosecutor. maybe i'm not so upset about this because what i have gotten now is the jury heard that she said twice before, he was the shooter. he was the guy that opened fire. he had the ak-47 and then the jury saw she is absolutely terrified. to now get on the stand and answer any question at all and not hard to put two and two together. she is terrified. you can make a good argument because of this guy, this defendant, who's sitting inside of this courtroom. so maybe, what do you think about this? maybe as the prosecutor, thinking, okay. i've got the fact that this guy is so bad that this witness is terrified to answer a question honestly and i still got the jury to hear what she said the last time. what do you think? >> well, as the defense attorney

here, i'm happy the way it is. i like the fact the witness is not saying my guy is the first shooter here. i mean, i have that off the table here. you can make whatever inferences you want but i've got an instruction to the jury this is the evidence that you can only consider and you're going to hammer in on that and so you have the inference that maybe out there and not evidence. >> and absolutely right. legally, you are absolutely right. the jurors shouldn't be able to use the previous testimony to say that it was him but how about a reality? >> but common sense, they do -- they don't throw the common sense out the window when they walk in and they swear to be jurors and follow the law. common sense plays a part in being a juror and they see that witness on the stand and she clearly is terrified. why? they're going to ask themselves why. and they are not going to throw that out the window when they're coming and they're deliberating this case. >> one of the bizarre scenarios. you are not sure how the jury will handle all of this. want the show you some more of that testimony we were watching

a few moments ago. le roy larose, co-defendant, pld guilty to participated and contended he didn't open fire first. that damon darling opened fire first and describing what happened when he arrived back there in july of 2006. the man on the porch with the ak-47, starting to talk now about that gun battle. >> what does the person in front of you do at that point? >> focusing on me? >> yes. >> opened fire on me. >> and what if anything do you do? >> i was shocked. i stood still until i was hit in the face and then hit in the arm. >> at some point do you pull out your gun? >> yes. >> when? >> after i was hit. >> what do you do? >> i shoot back. >> how many timeyou shoot back? >> four. >> did you get to empty your gun? >> no. >> why not? >> because he turned to run. >> and what did you do? >> i turned to run. >> why did you keep firing the other two? >> i wasn't in danger from him

anymore. >> were you there to kill him? >> no. >> i didn't even know who it was. >> now, you say you -- right? >> yes. >> an you turn and run. >> yes. >> at that point, as you turn and run, what do you do with your firearm? >> i put it in my pocket. >> where do you go? >> i run back around the block. >> which way did you leave? >> i left on east and then went north on the next avenue. and then went back north -- west again back to my car. >> again, showing the exhibit 19. can you point for us where you ran back? >> back this way. and back around. i looked down this way to see if the guy was still there because i was going to make my decision to run back to my car or not. >> and when you looked this way, did you see the person that was on the porch? >> no. >> what did you do?

>> i ran back around and got back in the car. went to pull off. >> and what happened as you went to pull off? >> this guy here stepped back off the porch and i saw him raise the gun up at me so i pulled out into the street, hit the gas and put my head down. >> okay. now, as you pull out, which way do you leave? >> this way. >> now you just said that the guy with the boots is over here with the ak and had been shooting at you. why do you pull off that way? >> because this guy was on top of me and if i tried to make a u-turn, i would hit the rocks. i had to go with the flow and go straight across. >> when you're leaving the area, are your windows up or down? >> up. >> and as you're driving off, are you trying to fire out of your window? >> no. >> are you doing anything? >> no. i'm just ducked down trying to get out of the area. >> why? >> because someone was shooting at me. >> okay.

as you're running away, once first shots are fired, do the shots continue or do they stop? >> they stop. >> once you get back in your car, do the shots continue? >> yes. >> and as you're driving away, are shots being fired at you? >> yes. >> and that second person you saw with an assault rifle is still on that porch that you described to the jury over by 67? >> yes. >> the second guy that was standing in the porch over by 67, what kind of gun did he have? >> assault rifle. >> can you describe it? >> it looked like it was black and brown. >> was ait a shotgun? >> no.

it looked like it was sawed off. like it had -- hanging off. >> i'm showing you what's been admitted into evidence as state's exhibit 68, 67, 66 and 65. do you recognize these photos? >> yes. >> what are they? >> this is my car. >> is that the car you were driving that way zmai. >> yes. >> is that the car you were driving away as you were being fired on? >> yes.

when is the next time you looked snup. >> when i heard gunshots. >> where was the man with dreads at that point? >> away from us. >> where did your friend go? >> in her house. >> where did you go? >> in my house. >> what about shay? >> she tried to run but she didn't make it. >> so the sister of the victim in this case having to testify about her little sister trying to run and didn't make it. she talks about the man with the

dreads. where was he? he's le roy larose. pled guilty. he's describing what he did after the shooting dk place and then defense attorney jonathan meltz has a chance to ask him some questions. let's watch. >> when you drove away, did you go back to the scene that day? >> no. >> what did you do with the car? >> i parked at my friend's grandmother's house. >> why? >> to hide it from the people shooting at me. because the second time i was shot in that car. >> what did you do with the firearm? i threw in it a dumpster. >> why? >> to get rid of it. i didn't want to get caught with it. >> when you heard a little girl got shot, what did you do? >> i called the detectives the find out why they were looking for me. >> so you called the detectives. >> right. >> to find out why they were looking for you. >> yes.

>> well, didn't you know why they were looking for you? >> yes. i just found out that little girl was killed thatdy. >> the day that you spoke to them, did you tell them the truth? >> no. >> did you tell parts of the truth? >> yes. >> why didn't you tell them the whole truth? >> because i was scared. >> why were you scared? >> because a little girl got killed. >> were you later arrested? >> yes. >> were you charged? >> yes. >> did you plead guilty in this case, sir? >> yes. >> i'm showing you what's been admitted into evidence as state's exhibit 69. do you recognize this? >> yes. >> do you know what it is? >> yes. it's my plea agreement. >> have you read it before? >> yes. >> what did you plead guilty to, sir? >> second-degree murder with a firearm. >> how much time are you serving in prison? >> seven years in prison. ten years probation. >> so you have seven years in probation and ten years probation? >> yes. >> what else are you expected to

do? >> to give truthful testimony. >> and what happens, sir, if you violate that plea agreement and don't give truthful testimony? >> i do the rest of my life in jail. >> mr. larose, did you ever go to a car wash on 17th avenue? >> yes, i went to several on 17th avenue. >> did you ever go there with an ak-47? >> no. >> did you ever go there to confront the person that's sitting over there in the navy blue suit? >> no. i don't know him. >> have you ever threatened this man? >> no. >> sir, why did you plead guilty to second-degree murder? tell the members of the jury. >> because i feel bad about what happened to the little girl. i feel like maybe if i didn't go

there to buy weed that day with the gun she might still be living. i'm a father myself so i understand. >> did you provoke this person on that day? >> no. >> did you go there to threaten the defendant, damon darling, in this case? >> no. >> did you go there to threaten anybody that day? >> no. >> were you stalking anybody that day? >> no. i wasn't. >> mr. larose, are you an honest man? >> yes. >> have you told us the truth today? >> yes. >> can we rely upon you because you're an honest man? >> yes. >> you haven't lied to us for any reason today? >> no. >> is there a reason you would lie to us today? >> no. >> is there any pressure on you to testify in a way certain way? >> no. >> is there any pressure on you in any way? >> yes. i'm nervous. >> is there pressure to testify truthfully? >> yes. >> if you don't you go to prison for life. >> yes. >> you don't like prison? >> no. >> you have to cut your hair in

prison? >> yes. >> won't be able to see your family. >> right. >> your baby. >> right. >> and truthful testimony, the government determines if your testimony is truthful. right? >> i don't know who but i'm telling the truth about what happened. >> it's not me. right? >> right. >> i don't determine if it's truthful. >> right. >> right? it's not the people out there. right? >> right. >> who has the power to put you in prison? >> the judge. >> and who else? who did you enter a plea agreement with? >> the state. >> the state. the government. right? >> yes. >> they told you if you don't give truthful testimony, you go to prison? >> right. >> all right. so you actually have been a liar before in your life. correct? >> yes. i have told -- >> you lie when it helps you. >> i have told lies before, yes. >> you wouldn't tell a lie to hurt you, right? >> right. >> you tell a lie to help yourself. >> yes. >> so let me get this straight. you were charged with second-degree murder. right?

>> yes. >> facing life in prison. >> yes. >> right? something happened. right? >> yes. >> you're no longer charged with second-degree murder. >> i am still charged with second-degree murder. >> you're convicted. >> right. >> a convicted felon. >> right. >> one day you weren't convicted. you were facing life in prison. right? >> yes. >> something happened. and then, you're sentenced to only seven years. >> right. yave berisonor er thr ars? >> yes. >> you know a gang -- >> so interesting testimony then from le roy lose as we said a pivotal figure inside of this courtroom as part of the prosecution's case and we're pleased now to be joined by le roy larose's attorney who represented him throughout this. thank you for joining us. we appreciate . leme a you a first question that a lot of people asked here. that question is a lot of viewers have asked this. if indeed your client as he

described had no intention of getting involved in any confrontation, showed up there with a weapon to protect himself given to what happened him in the past, only pulled the weapon, only fired four times to defend himself, why would he plead guilty to second-degree murder? >> well, in order for him to go and prove his innocence, he would ha to withstand the rigors of a trial and as all of your viewers know, there actually is some evidence and there's a lot of smoke and to avoid the risk of facing a trial, he decided to go ahead and take a plea because he feels there' some culpabilityhile he may not not be directly responsible for the death, going to buy drugs in a neighrhood ke that with aun in your pocket, okay, when you know that there's someone out there looking to kill you is at the very best reckless and he believed there does lie some culpability and for that reason he decided that instead of risk

his life for the trial he could take a plea to get him out in a few years to go on and continue with his life he's also very remorseful about his role going there with a gun to buy drugs and for those that reasons he weneaid plt woty is eos h to and trial be co cd? sherda tankin o for g,ameteam well oe s n fwo lseen uut gr.whas smbu abo him? happen wasking hat this wouldan pple to with h brother, you know,

putting store fronts and he also had another job at walmart. he wasng two jobshree children. one on the way. and in fact, at the time that he went to buy weed, he had not smoked marijuana for six months and the pressure of the wife for a cesarean two days later got to him and he's a family man. he's hard working. gentle and stopped smoking and generally a really good kid. >> did he have any history of violence in the background? >> oh, never. no arrests. no convictions. ne you speak to, any of the people he grew up with a s alys tfrndk about h owing up as a mixed race child in that type of neighborhood was really rough for him. he persevered and didn't involved, notwithstanding the fact that many of the friends did end up in jail and getting into gan and crime. syed straigt he had children. he worked hard and did very well considering tcircumstances. >> when he got on the stand erdayest and testified, he told the story that he's told

consistently, fairly consistently after first conversation with police, obviously, he didn't give all the details. subsequently he's told the story and has been fairly consistent. >> right. >> but when he was asked if he could identify damon darling, the defendant in the courtroom as the man that opened fire on him with the ak-47, he said he couldn't. was that a surpris at all? >> not at all. actually, le roy maintained he never knew damon darling and could never pick him out standing in front of him. the first time le roy went to a holding cell, they put them together and he had no idea who was standing next to him until they came and called damon darling's name and surprised to hear he was a few feet away f him. it sounds as if the attempt on le roy's life is actlly a stake. whiches this case even more bizarre is that they actually have no real trouble with each other. le roy doesn't know damon darling. maybe it's an issue about the

silver honda. maybe they're after him because they believe he was involved wi something else. he didn't recognize him and pass add polygraph two times with the same to lig fer of the united states attorney's office where he was asked do you know damon darrelling? did you recognize him? or did you pull out a gun only after you were shot? and he answered all of those questions truthfully so no he didn't know damon darling and didn't pull a gun until after he was shot and found no indation of deception on the polygraphs and doesn't know damon darling was and he until the court case started d started to meet each other, going back and forth from the courtroom, didn't know who damon darling was. >> last quick question for you. does it appear as h attorney he adhered to the agreement and done what's necessary in tms of his involvement here and as a consequence the year term would, in fact, be imposed? >> well, actually, the seven

years was offered and we accepted it before le roy agreed to testify. only afterwards once we had the agreement sealed did we agree for no credit at all to ttify against damon darling because, remember, he's charged with attempted murder on le roy larose. he's charged with trying to kill le roy and agreed to testify because he is a victim in this case and for no other reason. >> well, i want to thank you for spending sometime and helping us understand this. this is a confusing trial as you know and given all of this. the details you offered up help us mensely. thank u for spending somete with us. we appreciate it. >> thank you. >> all right. you take care. that again, the attorney for le roy larose who we have been showing you some of his testimony yesterday. a pivotal witness in that trial. we are going to step aside for a quick break. antime, the ourtside" quiz

for today. you can e-mail us our answer. log on to cnn.com/crime. we'll announce the name of the first viewer to come up with the correct answer. (announcer) listening to you. it's how we save you money nationwide insurance. my name is sandy garza and i am on your side. only nationwide gives you an on your side review. you tell us about your life and your insurance. sometimes you don't have enough coverage. or you may even have too much. we'll let you know. we listen and build you a custom policy of just the coverage you need at the right price for you.

(announcer) only a nationwide insurance agent can give you an on your side review. call this number to save up to $523. we take a look at the policy and look to see if there's any gaps in coverage. you know, in addition, we talk about discounts that are available. and we try to save you money. i mean we really do. (anncr:) call this number no or call a local agent. switch today and save up to $523. listening and saving you money is how... ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪

the answer, edward locascio. convicted inmiami-dade courthse for theder o h wife of 28 e stateed t ctet killed his wife the avoidayinga nd-d ree murder and enced 1ea y the life in prison. and neil entwistle charged in the death of his wife and ughter. entenced to le inlty prisonithout parole. ruth fromth linaro first viewer to e-mail us with that correct answer. meantime,e've been ctinuing the coverage of the tal out o 're k.breasion th you for today, want to talk wi beth karas and get a -- again, a look at ws happened

so far and what ware looking at down the ro. soth, they took a eloated whhe pbl tns. let'go over again. when's thewitness? what's oblem? do we know what's goi toake place when they're back of that courtroom soon? >>orter:l, to answer the last o first,eknow. policew enrcemenooki ng enguns h th t tz ret ckhaho rl nos and monica gordo asked the court to have an adjournment until 2:00 thee police officer on i stdinterim. the man that arrestedamon darling and prepared to put the

lead detective on the stand this morning. orlando garcia. the videotaped statement will be played for the jury we expect. sometime before the top of the next hour. >> so beth, you mentioned that the defendant's statement will be played. was there any indication whatsoever by the defense either an opening statement or any other time to be considering putting damon darling on the stand to testify? >> reporter: no. i would be surprised if he testifies but usually a question that we don't get the answer to until well into the defense case. it's just too early to tell. even if mr. meltz made up his mind but it's the client's decision and he'll advise but he wouldn't tell me. >> beth, 20 seconds left here. what's the best estimate in terms of how long the trial is now going to take? >> reporter: well, monica gordo said she expected to rest tomorrow or monday but that's before, of course, today's delayed with a witness so i expect that the state will rest

sometime early next week. it's probably going to be a short defense case. don't know about a rebuttal case but should go to the jury by the middle of next week. >> all right. keep an eye on everything for us, as always. we appreciate it. beth karas live from miami, florida. thanks also to our guests. jennifer, jonathan for spending time with us today. we appreciate it. speaking of our friends, friend jami floyd is back and hopefully feeling back up next on "the best defense." i'd have sk you what you have next but we're not sure. >> i was able to catch up on episodes of "the wire." jack ford. which i know -- our favorite show. >> yes. indeed. i came back to this live trial which i think, jack, you and i know evoke the themes of that program which was fictionalized. >> mentioned that yesterday. funny you say that. >> i know because i was watching. we are going did talk on "the best defense" about the real-life issues brought to bear by the live trial and how it's

like most trials in america's courts around the country. >> all right, jami. glad you're back and feeling back. that's next. does it for us today. we're back tomorrow. our regular time in the courtroom. see you then. s s s s s s s s s