Twenty-Four-Year-Old Murder Suspect’s Identity in Dispute

By Breeze Cofield [former] - January 26, 2024
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

On Jan. 24, Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge John A. Howard heard closing arguments from defense attorney, Roland S. Harris, and the prosecution in the murder trial of 24-year-old Knowledge Hamilton.

Hamilton, 24, is charged with first-degree murder, firearm use in a felony violent crime, attempted first- and second-degree murder first- and second-degree assault, possession of  a deadly weapon with the intent to injure, having a loaded handgun on his person and firearm possession with a felony conviction in connection to the Sept. 14, 2022, murder of 36-year-old Turrell Davis.

During closing arguments, the prosecution claimed that a five minute altercation between the defendant and a female witness ultimately led to Davis’ death in a complex series of events. 

Video footage allegedly shows Hamilton using a belt to assault a female witness. 

“[Hamilton] said he hit the victim with [a] belt because he didn’t want to hit her with his fist, ‘dirty’–[that’s] also known as then Turrell Davis got involved. ” 

As the melee unfolded Davis reportedly punched Hamilton in a dispute about a debt between two women. Following that a male witness was hit by gunfire as he was trying to run away.

“Turrell Davis will never come back from this incident,” the prosecutor explained.

The prosecution said that this was a case of two reluctant witnesses to the crime. Although neither could identify Hamilton as the shooter, “Both witnesses were unequivocally sure that the person who assaulted the victim is the same person responsible for murdering Turrell Davis.” 

In his closing argument, Harris disputed the victim’s identification. One of the victims described the shooter as having a tattoo on his face and wearing blue jeans. Harris said, the defendant does not have a tattoo on his face and there were multiple people present wearing blue jeans, Harris said. 

“Both witnesses said there could have been more than one shooter present. I think the state is contorting the witness’s statement,” he explained.