Trial Continues for Defendant Accused of Attempted Murder

By Baltimore Witness Staff - April 26, 2022
Attempted Murder | Court | Daily Stories | Non-Fatal Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

Defense counsel for a defendant accused of attempted murder nearly one year ago argued that the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence linking the defendant to the crime during an ongoing jury trial on April 26 before Baltimore City Circuit Court Philip S. Jackson.

Blair Jones, 21, is charged with attempted first and second-degree murder, first and second-degree assault, conspiracy to first-degree murder, conspiracy to first and second-degree assault, use of a firearm during a violent crime, conspiracy to use of a firearm during a violent crime, possessing a firearm with a felony conviction, illegal possession of a regulated firearm, having a handgun on his person, wearing/carrying a handgun within 100 yards of the public, reckless endangerment, discharging firearms, and illegal possession of ammo.  in connection to the shooting on May 8, 2021.

The victim was the first to testify, about what happened on May 8 at Royal Farms. The victim, who was 33 years old at the time, said he arrived at Royal Farms at approximately 3 a.m. to purchase two items and then he was headed to the casino to “hopefully become rich.”

As the victim was checking out, he said he saw an individual pacing back and forth behind him at a high rate of speed.

“I’m from Baltimore City, you don’t pace around someone like that because that’s a red flag to me,” the victim said. He also mentioned that he turned around to confront the defendant for being too close to him and they ended up getting into a verbal altercation.

The prosecutor displayed a video that showed the outside of Royal Farms asking the victim to identify himself in the video. The prosecutor asked the victim to explain why he was standing outside of the establishment.

The victim said he was standing outside waiting for the defendant because he thought there was going to be a fight but nothing happened so he walked away. However, as he is walking off two individuals began calling out to him. 

The victim mentioned he didn’t turn around until he heard the individuals picking up speed and, as he turned around, he saw another individual who was not part of the altercation in Royal farms pull out his gun. 

The victim was shot in the right ankle but kept running until he felt as though he was safe and called 911.

During cross-examination, Rowland mentions that because the victim has been convicted of armed robbery and carjacking he should know how a robbery operates. 

Rowland argues that the defendant was calling for the victim to possibly apologize about the altercation in Royal farms, but the victim disagreed. “If that was the case I wouldn’t have been shot,” the victim said.  

Rowland said the victim never returned the detective’s phone calls nor did he complete a photo array to positively identify her client as the man caught on surveillance.  

The responding police officer’s body camera was shown to the jury, which showed the officer arriving at the scene, him approaching the witness suffering from gunshot wounds, and him following the medics to the hospital to ensure the victim was secure and safe.

During cross-examination, Rowland asked if any police officers went back to Royal Farms to find any eyewitnesses and the police officer said, “yes we normally do that after an incident.”

The trial will resume with closing arguments on April 27.