Others Charged In Barnes Teen Murder?: Court Filings Reveal Potential Plea Deal And Joint Trial Of Defendants Motion

In just two days Michael Johnson will appeal before a Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge facing a murder charge, that he killed Monroe, N.C. honors student Phylicia Simone Barnes, and motions filed by the State and Johnson’s Lawyer indicate that others may also appear for unknown charges. A review of Baltimore City Circuit Court Case #112116013 shows that MOTION FOR JOINT TRIAL OF DEFENDANTS AND OFFENSES was filed on May 23, 2012 in the Barnes murder case. The procedure is used when attorneys plan to try cases that include multiple defendants facing the exact same charges in which the parties are usually co-defendants in a crime. The only logical  purpose for such maneuvering is to consolidate the State’s Case when a defendant has turned State’s witness against other parties to a criminal act. Although no one else has been publicly mentioned in the Barnes teen killing, the motion is not a standard procedure, and the court filing shows the State’s hand which may potentially lead to others standing trial along side Michael Johnson. Attorneys usually do not file such documents unless they plan on introducing witness testimony from defendants who either corroborate their case or present damaging culpable evidence against at least one defendant link to a crime. At the very least, it’s a reasonable expectation that the eventual trial will contain charges against someone other than Johnson. Also the court file shows that a NOTICE OF PLEA BARGAIN POLICY was also filed with the court on May 23, 2012. That motion is a standard practice as many criminal cases result in a Plea Deal of some sort. The motion serves to advise defendants of their rights under the law, and for the most part advising defendants that the Plea isn’t binding because the presiding judge has the authority to reject such tentative agreements. The Plea Agreement Policy filing doesn’t necessarily mean Johnson is in negotiations with the state. In fact the document’s existence along with the “Joint Trial” motion tends to point to a co-defendant or a culpable witness taking the stand against Michael. The case file also appears to be framing the direction in which the state’s case is heading against Johnson. The presence of motions for an “expert witness” and a DEMAND FOR CHEMIST filing points to a rather scientific aspect of the case against Johnson. My significant other, who is a Forensic Science Teacher, tells me that there must be some DNA or other Forensic evidence in the case’ discovery that links Johnson and possibly others to the crime. The need for a chemist in the Barnes teen murder illustrates that something was found during the toxicology testing when young Phylicia Barnes’ body was examined by the state’s coroner. Why else would there be a need for such a scientific professional other than to explain in court what authorities learned was in the child’s blood system? If my assumptions are accurate, I’m sure that part of the state’s case will almost certainly disclose whether the child had drugs, alcohol, and other substances in her system upon her death. There has been wide speculation that something may have happened to young Phylicia during a party the night before her disappearance. With that being said, the state may have witnesses who have already spelled out exactly what went down, and might support the reason a potential Plea Deal could be in the works. I can see one of the involved parties flipping to safe their own neck and “rating out” Michael Johnson. Another interesting motion that was filed in the case is a MOTION TO SUPPRESS PURSUANT TO MD 4-252 AND 4-253This portion of the Maryland Annotated Code was a good read, clearly demonstrating that Johnson’s attorney wants some of the evidence against his client thrown out, and I would suspect that it’s information obtained when Russell Barnes’ brother (a Baltimore Police Sgt.) showed up at Deena’s apartment and began questioning people before a formal complaint was even filed with the Baltimore Police when Phylicia first went missing. None the less, the motion depicts damaging evidence against Johnson  so sever that it merits his attorney seeking to have it concealed. So, barring physical evidence against Johnson, and there appears to be some, the state’s case obviously has some other solid evidence that proves Michael Johnson was at least involved in the murder of Phylicia Barnes. The courts filing history proves at the very least, some of the people close to Johnson have made statements against him, which is something a judge alluded to during Michael’s Bail Hearing when he stated, “the defendant maybe a danger to society especially those closest to him” while remanding Johnson to custody without Bail. So, the cookies just may have started crumbling in the silence that once plagued this murder case. On the surface the case appears to be weak, but a review of the case’ court filing history appears to unveil that the state hasn’t exactly played it’s trump card just yet. Read the court filing history of the Barnes murder case here: The State’s Case Against Michael Johnson

 

 

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

David Adams

Self proclaimed geek, Advocate for the homeless, Social Change, Crime Blogger, and mobile technology enthusiast. Recognized journalist and Human Interest Writer championing the plight of the masses whom are without a voice of their own.

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
TwitterFacebookLinkedInGoogle Plus

In just two days Michael Johnson will appeal before a Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge facing a murder charge, that he killed Monroe, N.C. honors student Phylicia Simone Barnes, and motions filed by the State and Johnson’s Lawyer indicate that others may also appear for unknown charges. A review of Baltimore City Circuit Court Case #112116013 shows that MOTION FOR JOINT TRIAL OF DEFENDANTS AND OFFENSES was filed on May 23, 2012 in the Barnes murder case. The procedure is used when attorneys plan to try cases that include multiple defendants facing the exact same charges in which the parties are usually co-defendants in a crime. The only logical  purpose for such maneuvering is to consolidate the State’s Case when a defendant has turned State’s witness against other parties to a criminal act. Although no one else has been publicly mentioned in the Barnes teen killing, the motion is not a standard procedure, and the court filing shows the State’s hand which may potentially lead to others standing trial along side Michael Johnson. Attorneys usually do not file such documents unless they plan on introducing witness testimony from defendants who either corroborate their case or present damaging culpable evidence against at least one defendant link to a crime. At the very least, it’s a reasonable expectation that the eventual trial will contain charges against someone other than Johnson. Also the court file shows that a NOTICE OF PLEA BARGAIN POLICY was also filed with the court on May 23, 2012. That motion is a standard practice as many criminal cases result in a Plea Deal of some sort. The motion serves to advise defendants of their rights under the law, and for the most part advising defendants that the Plea isn’t binding because the presiding judge has the authority to reject such tentative agreements. The Plea Agreement Policy filing doesn’t necessarily mean Johnson is in negotiations with the state. In fact the document’s existence along with the “Joint Trial” motion tends to point to a co-defendant or a culpable witness taking the stand against Michael. The case file also appears to be framing the direction in which the state’s case is heading against Johnson. The presence of motions for an “expert witness” and a DEMAND FOR CHEMIST filing points to a rather scientific aspect of the case against Johnson. My significant other, who is a Forensic Science Teacher, tells me that there must be some DNA or other Forensic evidence in the case’ discovery that links Johnson and possibly others to the crime. The need for a chemist in the Barnes teen murder illustrates that something was found during the toxicology testing when young Phylicia Barnes’ body was examined by the state’s coroner. Why else would there be a need for such a scientific professional other than to explain in court what authorities learned was in the child’s blood system? If my assumptions are accurate, I’m sure that part of the state’s case will almost certainly disclose whether the child had drugs, alcohol, and other substances in her system upon her death. There has been wide speculation that something may have happened to young Phylicia during a party the night before her disappearance. With that being said, the state may have witnesses who have already spelled out exactly what went down, and might support the reason a potential Plea Deal could be in the works. I can see one of the involved parties flipping to safe their own neck and “rating out” Michael Johnson. Another interesting motion that was filed in the case is a MOTION TO SUPPRESS PURSUANT TO MD 4-252 AND 4-253This portion of the Maryland Annotated Code was a good read, clearly demonstrating that Johnson’s attorney wants some of the evidence against his client thrown out, and I would suspect that it’s information obtained when Russell Barnes’ brother (a Baltimore Police Sgt.) showed up at Deena’s apartment and began questioning people before a formal complaint was even filed with the Baltimore Police when Phylicia first went missing. None the less, the motion depicts damaging evidence against Johnson  so sever that it merits his attorney seeking to have it concealed. So, barring physical evidence against Johnson, and there appears to be some, the state’s case obviously has some other solid evidence that proves Michael Johnson was at least involved in the murder of Phylicia Barnes. The courts filing history proves at the very least, some of the people close to Johnson have made statements against him, which is something a judge alluded to during Michael’s Bail Hearing when he stated, “the defendant maybe a danger to society especially those closest to him” while remanding Johnson to custody without Bail. So, the cookies just may have started crumbling in the silence that once plagued this murder case. On the surface the case appears to be weak, but a review of the case’ court filing history appears to unveil that the state hasn’t exactly played it’s trump card just yet. Read the court filing history of the Barnes murder case here: The State’s Case Against Michael Johnson

 

 

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

David Adams

Self proclaimed geek, Advocate for the homeless, Social Change, Crime Blogger, and mobile technology enthusiast. Recognized journalist and Human Interest Writer championing the plight of the masses whom are without a voice of their own.

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
TwitterFacebookLinkedInGoogle Plus

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

- See more at: http://thepeopleschampion.me/wp-admin/options-general.php?page=side-tab#sthash.HEuco14y.dpuf