Defendant’s Former Employer ‘Refused to ID’ Accused Shooter Due to Their Close Relationship

Thank you for reading Baltimore Witness.
Help us continue our mission into 2025 by donating to our end of year campaign.

Donate Now

The victim of an attempted murder “refused to identify” defendant Devon Murray, 31, as the shooter due to their close relationship, a Baltimore City prosecutor told jurors during closing arguments on March 3.

After brief deliberations on Friday, the jury found Murray not guilty of attempted first and second-degree murder, but guilty of first-degree assault, reckless endangerment, and firearm use in a felony violent crime. A verdict was not rendered for the defendant’s second-degree assault charge.

Murray, who was permitted to remain on home detention, is currently scheduled for sentencing on July 3; however, counsel is expected to discuss a motion for a new trial after Murray claimed he did not understand the prosecution’s previously mentioned plea offer.

“The victim came in [to court] and said he was shot at,” defense attorney Janine Meckler said during her closing argument. “There was no name or description given. … When the victim is shown the MVA photo of the defendant, he said it’s not the same person who shot him.”

The defendant was accused of shooting his former employer at his mechanic shop on the 2200 block of Reisterstown Road on Sept. 25, 2019.

The trial began on March 2 before Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Charles Peters but was transferred to Judge Jennifer Schiffer after Judge Peters became ill.

The question of who shot the victim was a heavily debated topic over the course of Murray’s trial, as the prosecution previously told the jury that the victim identified the defendant as the shooter in a photo array with Baltimore Police.

“The victim refused to identify the defendant because he’s like a son to him,” the prosecutor said earlier in the proceeding.

Meckler countered that this contradicted the victim’s testimony at trial

“You need to look at the quality of the investigation,” she continued. “You don’t know what the victim said prior to the shooting. All you have to go on is what he said during his testimony.”