This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/nyregion/randolph-holder-tyrone-howard.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Though Divided, Jury Delivers Guilty Verdict in Murder of Police Officer Jury Delivers Guilty Verdict in Murder of Police Officer
(about 17 hours later)
After four days of difficult deliberations, a jury in Manhattan found a small-time drug dealer guilty on Monday of murdering a police officer during a desperate flight from a gunfight with other gang members in October 2015.After four days of difficult deliberations, a jury in Manhattan found a small-time drug dealer guilty on Monday of murdering a police officer during a desperate flight from a gunfight with other gang members in October 2015.
The man, Tyrone Howard, 32, sat stone-faced as the jury foreman announced that he had been convicted of aggravated first-degree homicide for the shooting death of Officer Randolph Holder, a charge carrying a mandatory sentence of life without parole. Three of the jurors were in tears as they confirmed the verdict, which came only two hours after they sent the judge a note saying they were deadlocked on some charges.The man, Tyrone Howard, 32, sat stone-faced as the jury foreman announced that he had been convicted of aggravated first-degree homicide for the shooting death of Officer Randolph Holder, a charge carrying a mandatory sentence of life without parole. Three of the jurors were in tears as they confirmed the verdict, which came only two hours after they sent the judge a note saying they were deadlocked on some charges.
Officer Holder’s father, Randolph Holder Sr., nodded as the verdict was read, and as Mr. Howard was pronounced guilty for every charge in a long list that included robbery and criminal possession of a weapon, Mr. Holder removed his glasses and dabbed tears from his eyes. His wife, Princess, cried beside him.Officer Holder’s father, Randolph Holder Sr., nodded as the verdict was read, and as Mr. Howard was pronounced guilty for every charge in a long list that included robbery and criminal possession of a weapon, Mr. Holder removed his glasses and dabbed tears from his eyes. His wife, Princess, cried beside him.
The courtroom was packed with dozens of police officers and their union leaders, who had been there every day of the deliberations in a show of support for their fallen comrade. Several hugged Mr. Holder as Mr. Howard was led out in handcuffs.The courtroom was packed with dozens of police officers and their union leaders, who had been there every day of the deliberations in a show of support for their fallen comrade. Several hugged Mr. Holder as Mr. Howard was led out in handcuffs.
After the verdict was read, the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., shook hands with and embraced the president of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, Patrick J. Lynch, who said, “Well done.”After the verdict was read, the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., shook hands with and embraced the president of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, Patrick J. Lynch, who said, “Well done.”
Outside, Mr. Vance thanked the jury for “a decision that I think is both thoughtful and comports with fairness and justice in this case.”Outside, Mr. Vance thanked the jury for “a decision that I think is both thoughtful and comports with fairness and justice in this case.”
“This is a tragic case and a sad day, but we can’t thank our police officers enough for putting their lives on the line every day,” Mr. Vance said. “This case reinforces the importance of what illegal guns mean to New York City and the danger they put our city in, as well as our officers.”“This is a tragic case and a sad day, but we can’t thank our police officers enough for putting their lives on the line every day,” Mr. Vance said. “This case reinforces the importance of what illegal guns mean to New York City and the danger they put our city in, as well as our officers.”
During a monthlong trial, prosecutors presented evidence that Mr. Howard was involved in a gunfight that broke out at 8:30 p.m. between rival gang members on 102nd Street in East Harlem on Oct. 20, 2015. He dropped a backpack and fled up the promenade toward 120th Street, stealing a bicycle along the way, according to prosecutors.During a monthlong trial, prosecutors presented evidence that Mr. Howard was involved in a gunfight that broke out at 8:30 p.m. between rival gang members on 102nd Street in East Harlem on Oct. 20, 2015. He dropped a backpack and fled up the promenade toward 120th Street, stealing a bicycle along the way, according to prosecutors.
Thirteen minutes later, at 120th Street, he ran into Officer Holder and his partner that day, Officer Omar Wallace, on a desolate ramp leading to a footbridge over Franklin D. Roosevelt Drive. The officers were in plainclothes but had their badges showing.Thirteen minutes later, at 120th Street, he ran into Officer Holder and his partner that day, Officer Omar Wallace, on a desolate ramp leading to a footbridge over Franklin D. Roosevelt Drive. The officers were in plainclothes but had their badges showing.
Officer Wallace testified that he recognized Mr. Howard as he came up the ramp on a bicycle because he had arrested him for smoking marijuana the year before. Officer Wallace said he shouted, “Hey!” at the defendant. Mr. Howard jumped off the bike, produced a gun and fired it, hitting Officer Holder in the head, Officer Wallace said. Officer Wallace said he then returned fire.Officer Wallace testified that he recognized Mr. Howard as he came up the ramp on a bicycle because he had arrested him for smoking marijuana the year before. Officer Wallace said he shouted, “Hey!” at the defendant. Mr. Howard jumped off the bike, produced a gun and fired it, hitting Officer Holder in the head, Officer Wallace said. Officer Wallace said he then returned fire.
Mr. Howard, who was wounded in the buttocks, fled and was arrested four blocks north. Police divers soon found the .40-caliber Glock pistol used to kill the officer in the river.Mr. Howard, who was wounded in the buttocks, fled and was arrested four blocks north. Police divers soon found the .40-caliber Glock pistol used to kill the officer in the river.
During her summations last week, the lead prosecutor, Linda Ford, methodically laid out the evidence from more than two dozen witnesses, surveillance cameras and 911 calls. She argued that Mr. Howard knew the two men approaching him were police officers because the area was swarming with officers and he was on the run from another shooting. She said he purposely shot Officer Holder to escape capture.During her summations last week, the lead prosecutor, Linda Ford, methodically laid out the evidence from more than two dozen witnesses, surveillance cameras and 911 calls. She argued that Mr. Howard knew the two men approaching him were police officers because the area was swarming with officers and he was on the run from another shooting. She said he purposely shot Officer Holder to escape capture.
But Mr. Howard’s lawyer, Michael Hurwitz, argued that the prosecution had not proved Mr. Howard knew the men coming toward him were police officers, which is required for the aggravated first-degree murder charge. “We know it was dark,” Mr. Hurwitz said. “We know it was quick, and we know the police officers are in civilian clothes.”But Mr. Howard’s lawyer, Michael Hurwitz, argued that the prosecution had not proved Mr. Howard knew the men coming toward him were police officers, which is required for the aggravated first-degree murder charge. “We know it was dark,” Mr. Hurwitz said. “We know it was quick, and we know the police officers are in civilian clothes.”
Mr. Hurwitz also contended that Officer Wallace made a mistake when he identified Mr. Howard as the gunman. He pointed out that it was a dark night and that the light on the ramp was dim. It was unlikely, he said, that the officer could recognize someone he had arrested only once, 14 months earlier, under those conditions. “People make mistakes,” he said.Mr. Hurwitz also contended that Officer Wallace made a mistake when he identified Mr. Howard as the gunman. He pointed out that it was a dark night and that the light on the ramp was dim. It was unlikely, he said, that the officer could recognize someone he had arrested only once, 14 months earlier, under those conditions. “People make mistakes,” he said.
On Monday afternoon, the jurors sent a note to the judge saying they could not come to an agreement on some charges. That note came after several others asking, among other things, for the definition of reasonable doubt and to hear the testimony of Officer Wallace again. The judge, Justice Michael J. Obus, told them to keep deliberating, and they reached a verdict at 5 p.m.On Monday afternoon, the jurors sent a note to the judge saying they could not come to an agreement on some charges. That note came after several others asking, among other things, for the definition of reasonable doubt and to hear the testimony of Officer Wallace again. The judge, Justice Michael J. Obus, told them to keep deliberating, and they reached a verdict at 5 p.m.
As they left the courthouse, the jurors declined to say what the sticking points had been but said the deliberations had been extremely difficult, with a few jurors unconvinced of Mr. Holder’s guilt on some charges. As they left the courthouse, the jurors declined to say what the sticking points had been but said the deliberations had been extremely difficult, with a few jurors unconvinced of Mr. Howard’s guilt on some charges.
“In a way it was like ‘Twelve Angry Men’ in reverse,” said Jane Ritter, a retired schoolteacher on the panel who wept during the verdict.“In a way it was like ‘Twelve Angry Men’ in reverse,” said Jane Ritter, a retired schoolteacher on the panel who wept during the verdict.
Another juror, Alfred Berneti, a bartender, said the jury had been deeply divided at points, without giving details. “There were some hard-core opinions, but we respected the fact that we had different opinions,” he said. “We just wanted to do what was right and follow the semantics and the law.”Another juror, Alfred Berneti, a bartender, said the jury had been deeply divided at points, without giving details. “There were some hard-core opinions, but we respected the fact that we had different opinions,” he said. “We just wanted to do what was right and follow the semantics and the law.”