Trial Proceedings Begin for Baltimore Man Accused of Murdering Former UMD Football Player in 2019

By Brooke Uzzell [former] , Mackenzie Wright [former] - March 18, 2022
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

Open statements and witness testimony began on March 18 for a homicide defendant before Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Philip S. Jackson.

Kalim Satterfield, 23, is charged with first-degree murder, use of a firearm during a violent crime, illegal possession of a regulated firearm, and having a handgun on his person in connection to an incident that occurred on May 29, 2019. 

The prosecutor began opening statements painting a very striking image of what happened in the eyes of one of the witnesses who was there when David Mackall Jr., 28, was killed.

The prosecutor recalls the moments when Mackall Jr. was shot, describing how he was shot twice in his neck, five times in his back, and once in his hand. 

During open arguments the prosecutor explains that a series of photo arrays, at various times, were administered to the victim’s girlfriend and the victim’s girlfriend’s father, witnesses of the crime, by the Baltimore Police Department.

The prosecutor said the victim’s girlfriend was able to identify Satterfield as the shooter, but not immediately during the first photo array session. Out of the six photos presented to the girlfriend in the array, two suspects stood out the most because of their light skinned complexion, according to the witness. 

Following the first photo array session, the victim’s girlfriend happened to be browsing on social media one day and identified an individual that matched one of the two photos singled out in the photo array. After reporting to the homicide unit what she saw online, the victim’s girlfriend made a positive identification, indicating Satterfield as the suspect.

The witness testified that it took her three weeks between interviews with police to be able to make a positive identification. According to the witness, she based her identification on the defendant’s skin color in comparison to the other photos, which she claimed were “too darkskin” to have been the shooter. 

She also testified that she had initially lied to detectives when asked if she had seen the shooter. The shooter, she described, wore a white shirt, blue track pants, and a white sweatshirt tied around his face. 

The same witness also admitted to receiving upwards of $70,000 from the State’s Attorney’s office for relocation and housing following the shooting, and she has been unemployed since March 2020.

In another interview conducted by police, the victim’s girlfriend’s father was also administered a photo array and video footage from the incident. The victim’s girlfriend’s father focused long and hard on one of the suspects in the photo array, but he could not make a positive identification at that time. 

Opening arguments from the defense illustrate a much different perspective. 

“I’m here today to achieve justice for Kalim Satterfield, because he is innocent,” Satterfield’s defense attorney, Donald Wright told the jury. “[The prosecutor] asked you to imagine the horror of having your significant other killed… imagine being wrongfully accused. [The prosecutor] has to prove what and who. We both agree on what but disagree on who. This case is a perfect case study for misidentification.”

The errors in procedural policing in this case were exposed by Wright, arguing to the jury that a double-blind photo array must be administered by a neutral detective, not lead detectives on the case because of the possibility of suggestion. The double-blind photo array was designed to prevent misidentification and conviction of the innocent, Wright said.

Before the day of the crime, the victim’s girlfriend and her father had never seen Satterfield before, Wright said. In addition, he called the victim’s girlfriend’s father not truthful.

To further prove his client’s innocence, Wright provided jurors with a timeline of events during the investigation before Satterfield was identified as a suspect in the case:

• On May 31, 2019, the victim’s girlfriend and her father were taken to speak with homicide detectives and were administered a photo array of six possible suspects. No identification had been made at that time. Kalim Satterfield was not a suspect yet, however police had another suspect. 
• On June 5, 2019, after looking at the photo array a second time, the father of the victim’s girlfriend told detectives that the killer is not in the photos.
• On June 6, 2019, the victim’s girlfriend was administered yet another photo array of six possible suspects, no I.D. was made. 
• On June 24, 2019, lead detectives showed the victim’s girlfriend’s father four photos that have 28 people in them. Among the 28 individuals, 27 out of 28 of them have a dark-skinned complexion. The only one left in the photos is Kalim Satterfield, who has light skinned complexion. 

“This is one of the most suggestive things I have ever seen in 20 years as a criminal defense attorney,” says Wright, explaining to the jury that lead detectives in this case may have blatantly coached the victim’s girlfriend’s father to pick a suspect in the photo array. 

Wright also touches on how the victim’s girlfriend told lead detectives on the case that she is 80 percent sure of the identification of Mackall Jr.’s killer. “What is she 80% sure of? What she saw online? Or the photos administered to her during the photo array interviews,” Wright said.

Addressing the evidence gathered in this case by the prosecutor, Wright argues there was no Honda located, no murder weapon found, and no clothing recovered from the day of the incident.

In addition, Wright revealed to the jury that the victim was found with two cell phones at the crime scene and at one point, the victim sold drugs to his girlfriend’s father. 

According to court documents, on May 29, 2019, at approximately 2:45p.m., officers responded to the 1900 block of Braddish Avenue for a Shot Spotter alert. When officers arrived at the scene, they located Mackall Jr. laying in the middle of the street and suffering from multiple gunshot wounds. 

Mackall Jr. was taken to Shock Trauma, where he later died from his injuries.

Satterfield’s trial is scheduled to continue on March 21.