Thank you for reading Baltimore Witness.
Consider making a donation to help us continue our mission.
By
Ethan Russo
- July 25, 2025
Daily Stories
|
Non-Fatal Shooting
|
Attorneys debated whether the use of a handgun in an act of violence qualified as self-defense during closing arguments on July 25.
Jerome Davis, 35, is charged with first-degree assault, reckless endangerment, firearm possession with a prior conviction, and firearm use in a violent crime. In an incident on Oct. 30, 2024, Davis allegedly engaged in a shootout on the 2800 block of Woodbrook Avenue, sustaining a gunshot wound to the leg before fleeing the scene and calling the police.
Body-worn camera footage captured officers recovering a handgun from a nearby storm drain, later identified as one of several used in the shooting. DNA on the handgun matched that of Davis.
In her jury isntructions, Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Jennifer B. Schiffer said that it could acquit Davis on the basis that his alleged actions were legitimately in self-defense.
In their closing statement, the prosecution noted that self-defense requires an effort to retreat. Davis, they said, made no such effort. Surveillance footage is said to capture him driving to the location of the incident, exiting the vehicle, and approaching an individual with a handgun.
Five shell casings, consistent with the gun recovered from the storm drain, were also recovered. Blood extracted from the scene allegedly confirms that Davis was a participant in the shootout, and video evidence does not show him making an immediate effort to retreat.
The prosecution claimed that DNA, ballistics, and video evidence prove Davis guilty of all charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
In response, defense attorney Brandon Thornton argued that Davis acted in self-defense and was the victim of the incident. The surveillance footage, he noted, does not show how the incident began, nor does it confirm that Davis shot first or instigated the altercation.
Davis’ original decision not to retreat may deemed an exception to Maryland law as there was initially no safe route for him to escape.
Nothing is known about the other shooter, noted Thornton. He claimed that without definitive knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the parties to the incident, Davis cannot be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
In response, the prosecution replayed the recording of the incident. After the shootout begins, Davis is allegedly shown running after a wounded individual and continuing to fire his handgun before returning to his vehicle.
The facts, the prosecution said, are that Davis arrived at the scene armed, engaged in a shootout, and didn’t immediately retreat. Moreover, Davis should not have had the gun in the first place, as a previous felony conviction prohibited him from possessing one legally.
The blood trail, the disposal of the firearm, and the contradictions between the video footage and Davis’s interview with Baltimore police detectives prove he is guilty of all counts, claimed the prosecution.
The jury began deliberations on July 25.