Jurors in DA Jones property damage trial say they would’ve found defendants not guilty
After the judge declared a mistrial Wednesday in Columbus District Attorney Mark Jones’ felony property damage trial, none of the jurors in the case wanted their names disclosed in the press.
But at least seven who spoke to the Ledger-Enquirer outside the courtroom were of the same opinion: They would have found Jones and codefendant Erik Whittington not guilty, and they did not look favorably upon authorities who pushed the case to trial.
“Waste of time,” is the way one man described the charges, adding, “We could have been taking care of more important stuff.”
He was surprised police charged Jones and Whittington with felonies for the tire marks that Whittington and other custom-car enthusiasts left in the Columbus Civic Center parking lot as Jones filmed a campaign video there on May 17, 2021.
Anyone who looks at the Civic Center lots on Google Earth can see they’re full of black marks from motorists spinning their tires there for years, he said: “All these people did the same thing, but they’re not getting felony charges.”
Six more jurors gathered outside the Government Center after Judge Jeffery Monroe declared a mistrial expressed similar sentiments. They also would have voted to acquit the two defendants, they said, and they also did not approve of authorities’ prioritizing Jones’ prosecution for what the jurors saw as a petty offense.
They hear about assaults and homicides regularly on the news, and they see this as the city prioritizing property over people’s lives, they said.
“A parking lot is more important than a life? That’s what you’re telling me?” one woman scoffed.
Columbus attorney Chris Breault, who represented Jones, said he spoke to 10 jurors who told him they would have acquitted his client.
“I think this was a fraudulent case,” Breault said. “I think the evidence was created by the government to influence the election in favor of Mark Jones’ opponent, and after speaking with the jurors, they all believe the same thing, after hearing the evidence. I think this is an enormous waste of resources.”
Mark Jones’ opponent at the time was incumbent District Attorney Julia Slater, who lost to Jones in last year’s Democratic Primary. Facing no Republican opposition in the November General Election, Jones took office in January.
Whittington’s attorney William Kendrick also spoke with jurors afterward, laughing and joking with them outside the Government Center, where some hugged his client as they departed.
He also believed Whittington would have been found not guilty, had the trial continued:
“Speaking to the jurors, it seems pretty apparent that they weren’t happy with this case being brought. They thought that it was overkill. They thought that it was wrong.”
But he understood why Monroe had to cut the trial short, he said.
When one of the sequestered witnesses posted a TV live stream of the proceedings to her Facebook page, several others saw it, so they heard what other witnesses were saying and what questions were being asked, and could plan on how to respond, he said.
“We did a little bit of investigation to get to the bottom of that, and what we discovered was that the taint had spread too far,” he said.
The result could have violated his client’s right to a fair trial, and damaged the prosecution’s case as well, he said.
“For the fundamental fairness of a trial, one of the things you have to have is for witnesses to be able to independently testify when they’re asked questions,” he said. “If a second witness has the benefit of hearing what the first witness says, they can tweak and change their testimony in a way that would not really comport with the truth.”
Kendrick said he would “most certainly” continue to represent Whittington in a second trial.
“We hung in this far,” he said. “We’re going to ride it to the end.”