Proceedings in the shooting case of Durel D. Jones began Feb.19 before Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Kendra Y. Ausby, with counsel delivering opening statements and jurors hearing testimonies from several prosecution witnesses focused on the suspect’s attire.
Jones, a 36-year-old Baltimore resident who is represented by defense attorney Karyn Meriwether, is charged with nine counts, including attempted murder, assault, firearm use, reckless endangerment and five other gun violations.
Jones is charged in connection to a shooting incident that occurred minutes before midnight on June 14, 2025. At approximately 11:58 p.m., a Baltimore Police officer responded to a three-round ShotSpotter alert on the 2400 block of Sherwood Drive.
The victim, a Black male in his 40s, was located at a Citgo Gas Station on the 2300 block of Hartford Road, suffering from an apparent gunshot wound to the right thigh. According to the testimony of a Baltimore Police Department (BPD) detective, emergency responders found the victim standing despite his injury. The victim was transported to Johns Hopkins Hospital after reporting he was shot at the intersection of Sherwood and Cliftview Avenues, where officers later recovered three 9mm casings.
The victim later advised he was approached by two individuals in all black. He recalled fleeing and realizing he had been shot, a statement that was corroborated by recovered CCTV footage. Through continued investigation utilizing still images from surveillance, a person said to be Jones was positively identified as a suspect in the shooting.
The state argued surveillance footage and a black beanie with a white stripe tie linked the defendant to the shooting. “There’s no one that is involved in this shooting except the person in that chair – Mr. Jones,” said the prosecutor, pointing to the defense table. They told jurors a man wearing the same beanie appeared at the gas station minutes prior to the gunfire, as well as in footage from area surveillance cameras.
The prosecution also highlighted ballistic evidence recovered during the investigation, noting “shell casings are located just five feet away as the chase is happening.”
The defense meanwhile pointed to an identification error that investigators acted upon early in the shooting, indicating how detectives initially pinpointed the defendant’s brother as the perpetrator and brought him in for questioning. In response, Jones’ brother reportedly told detectives, “That’s not me, that’s my brother.”
“It was an error,” the prosecution told the defense, adding that the mistake “doesn’t have anything to do with the shooting.” ’
The defendant initially advised investigators that he heard the shooting, but denied involvement.The state maintained Jones’ guilt, adding he was not legally permitted to possess a firearm at the time of the incident.
In her opening argument, Meriwether pointed to perceived faults in the state’s investigation.
“They closed this case in thirteen days,” she argued. “They just picked someone.”
She went on to say the surveillance footage used in the investigation was difficult to make out, and claimed a lack of evidence to incriminate her client. On the stand, a police lieutenant later acknowledged Meriwether’s claim that no gun was recovered during the investigation.
“No eyewitnesses put him at the scene or with a gun in his hand,” Meriwether said. “This is based on guessing.”
Meriwether added that the beanie referenced by the state had been found in a common area of a home shared by three other adults
The trial is set to continue Feb. 20 with additional witness testimony.
