In closing statements presented before Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Hope Tipton on Jan. 23, the defense attempted to discredit the prosecution’s star witness, poking holes in their argument.
Travis Cothran is charged with attempted first-degree murder, attempted second-degree murder, first-degree assault, use of a firearm during a felony violent crime, reckless endangerment, illegal possession of a firearm during a felony violent crime, handgun on person, handgun in vehicle, discharge of any gun, pistol, or firearm, and illegal possession of ammunition for his alleged role in a Oct. 29, 2024 non-fatal shooting that occurred on the 2100 block of East North Avenue.
Natalie Finegar, Cothran’s attorney, said the prosecution’s main witness had an ulterior motive for identifying Cothran as the shooter. The witness was originally suspected of committing the crime, she said.
Finegar reminded the jury that the witness was questioned after his vehicle was identified in CCTV footage of the drive-by, but he denied any involvement.
However, when confronted with time-stamped video, the witness asked investigators, “What does it take to get me out of these handcuffs?”
Finegar said the witness then told police officers he was the getaway driver, but the passenger was the shooter.
She said the witness claimed he was not aware the individual had a gun until he pulled it out and began firing.
In a photo array, the witness identified this passenger as Cothran but refused to add his signature to verify his identification
The defense emphasized the refusal was evidence that his claims were false.
Finegar also said the prosecution did not believe his story because they charged him with conspiracy to commit first-degree attempted murder following his interview with police.
The prosecutor said that premeditation was proven by the witness’s testimony, indicating Cothran said the shooting was in retaliation for an earlier bar fight.
The prosecutor said Cothran asked the witness to take him on a ride, where he then shot out of the car and was dropped off with his weapon.
The witness’s initial reluctance to share information with the police was out of fear of law enforcement and “the streets,” the prosecution said.
In the prosecution’s closing, she argued that the witness was the only person besides Cothran who could recount that evening, adding that even though DNA does not exist in this case, the witness helps to piece together the events of Oct. 29
The jury began deliberating the evidence in the afternoon on Jan. 23.
