Day 4: Melton Trial Goes to Jury

By Todd Stauffer Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:17 p.m. CDT

Today's proceedings in the trial of Mayor Frank Melton and police officers Marcus Wright and Michael Recio began at 8:30 a.m., with the judge and attorneys for both side discussing instructions that would be given to the jury. At 10:00 a.m., the jury was called in and the judge read the instructions for nearly 45 minutes.

Perhaps the most important instruction concerned the definition of the word "malicious," which was defined as encompassing "ill will, wickedness of disposition, cruelty, recklessness or a mind regardless of social duty." The defense had argued that the jury should find "evil intent" in the actions of the defendants; late in the closing arguments, A.D.A. Stanley Alexander brought up these instructions, pointing out that the words "evil intent" were not in them.

During the instructions, Judge Webster also said that the jury will have to bring back separate verdicts for all 11 counts on separate sheets of paper.

Closing arguments in the trial began at around 11 a.m. and ended around 12:30 p.m.

Assistant District Attorney Dewey Arthur began closing arguments for the prosecution. He said that the defendants' argument was that the laws are discretionary and don't apply to them. He also said despite talk of Evans Welch being "the great satan," of 1305 Ridgeway Street, police had little to show from their repeat visits. "They show you a roach, a pipe and less than a half ounce of proof," he said, referring to cocaine seized from Ridgeway.

He said that proof the officers were not acting under authority of law was that they brought sledgehammers: "I've never seen police officers walking down the street with standard-issue sledgehammers." He said that the defense's contention that they showed no ill will was disproved by the fact that they dumped paint all over the stove. He also spoke of how "the Wood Street Players" came off the Mobile Command Center and chanted, "We're Wood Street, tearing up Virden."

The first attorney to speak for the defense was Robert Smith, who represents Marcus Wright. Smith questioned the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses, and tried to tease out contradictions. More than anything, however, he said that his client had acted with good intentions. "You can find their good intent, their good heart, in the fact that citizens complained about the house." He described the defendants as "brave men with good hearts" who, he said, were put on trial because they tried to fight crime. Senior Assistant D.A. Stanley Alexander made many objections during Smith's statement, most of which were sustained.

Winston Thompson, representing Michael Recio, also questioned the credibility of witnesses, saying for instance that Yolanda Allen's testimony contradicted itself. He said it was not really a criminal case, and that Jennifer Sutton (owner of the duplex) could bring a civil case to recover damages. He made much of the fact that a witness accused Recio of tearing down the awning of the duplex, saying that the awning was still standing in some photos. He also pointed out that prosecutors never brought Evans Welch to the stand. "Where's Bubba?" he asked, "Don't you think we should hear from Evans Welch?"

Merrida Coxwell spoke for Melton. He said that one thread runs through all the charges, and that's that to merit convictions, the defendants had to have acted willfully and maliciously. He pointed to the small amount of crack that Arthur had mentioned, and said, "It takes that much crack to start a flame that will destroy a house ... and an entire neighborhood."

Coxwell admitted that the mayor may have been frustrated and referred to eyewitness testimony that the mayor said, "This #### has got to stop." He acknowledged that the mayor's methods were unorthodox, but he said that something had to be done about crack. He also argued that Sutton could pursue civil action. Then he handed off the closing statement for Frank Melton to former Jackson Mayor Dale Danks.

Danks began: "Quite honestly, I was astonished when my friend, Frank Melton, was indicted ... but I was really astonished by what I've seen and heard in this trial." Danks said that the prosecution's own witnesses proved that 1305 Ridgeway is a drug house. He said that the prosecutors have had to "defend the existence of a crack house in this city." Alexander objected to this and the judge sustained.

Danks said that the prosecution had failed to make its case, and that the defendants were being punished for fighting crime. "(Melton) finds himself on trial for trying to rid this community of drugs. That's an injustice...the wrong people have been brought to trial in this case." At the end of Dank's statement, some members of the audience burst into applause, and Judge Webster asked for his gavel.

The final closing statement came from A.D.A Alexander. He said that in the United States, no one is above the law. He said it took Mississippi a long time to get to that place, but that it would remain that way as long as he was a prosecutor. "It's time we let that kind of behavior go in this state, in this country ... people marched, people fought, people died for their rights."

He addressed the crack house argument: "I keep hearing the words 'crack house,' 'crack house,' 'crack house.' If you look at these instructions you will not find the words 'crack house' in there." He said that a civil case was beside the point, because you shouldn't be able to pay your way out of breaking the law. He pointed out that much of the damage to the duplex was done while Welch was already sitting outside on the sidewalk in handcuffs; what then, he argued, was the point in tearing up the house?

He also referenced the "Wood Street Players," and their chant about Virden and said, "How are you espousing good will when you have one neighborhood set against another?" Soon after, he said, "How can you possibly uphold the law when you're breaking it?"

He concluded with a bit of theatrics from the film "A Time to Kill." He asked jurors to close their eyes and imagine that the defendants were not city officials, but just ordinary citizens. He asked them treat the defendants the same way they would other citizens.

At present, the jury is in deliberations.

Previous Commentsshow

What's this?

Support our reporting -- Follow the MFP.

Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Jackson Free Press