BOSTON (CBS/AP) — Jurors in the Mattapan murders trial were unable to reach a complete verdict after a fifth day of deliberations Tuesday, a day after they announced they have a verdict on some counts in the case,  but are deadlocked on others.

WBZ NewsRadio 1030’s Kim Tunnicliffe reports.

Dwayne Moore and Edward Washington each face four counts of first-degree murder in the executions of three adults and a toddler during a drug robbery  in September 2010.

washington moore1 Deadlocked Jury Struggles With Deliberations In Mattapan Massacre Trial

Dwayne Moore (left) and Edward Washington.

A fifth victim was left paralyzed.

Suffolk Superior Court Judge Christine McEvoy sealed the partial verdicts Monday afternoon and asked the jury to return Tuesday.

The jurors have told the judge they agree on 10 indictments, and are deadlocked over 9 others.

McEvoy told them Tuesday to take time and re-examine their positions.

Everyone was called back into the courtroom around 12:45 p.m. when the jurors told McEvoy it was clear to 11 jurors that one is unable to adhere to her instructions about ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.”

The judge re-read her instructions to the jury, told them they “must follow the law as I explain it to you” and then sent them back to resume their deliberations.

The case hinges on the credibility of the prosecution’s key witness, who admitted taking part in the robbery, but said he left before the shootings.

(TM and © Copyright 2012 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2012 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)

Comments (19)
  1. Rob Cleary says:

    Obviously these dummies truly are a jury of their peers. None of the animals in this case are worth saving. Find them guilty. Lock them up. Go home.Case Closed.

    1. Susie says:

      I think you need a job Rob!

      You have commented on every article today so far that I have read. Honestly nobody cares about or for your comments and opinions.

      1. Cynthia says:

        Hmmm, and you have had time to see what he has commented on…..just saying……..

      2. Roze says:

        Guess you don’t have a job either if you’re reading every article today and then assume nobody cares about his opinions, really ???

    2. Thank You Soldiers says:

      Actually some of us do care about Rob’s comments and opinions. He does come off callus most of the time but if there is an elephant in the room he is the one to say it. I usually look forward to see what he has to say on some of these urban kingdom issues.

      A spades a spade, right Rob?

  2. gramps says:

    8 women & 4 men on jury….

    One juror is ‘hanging’ the jury?

    Where’s ‘tsal’?


    1. tsal-kv says:

      gramps – awww are you lonely without me??. I’ve been playing with my new grandbaby – but I’m glad you have missed me.

    2. Tsal&kv says:

      I’m still laughing. That was more than funny gramps!

  3. Ed Hall says:

    I wonder if the lone holdout came from Florida – murder is legal there.

  4. RGS9559 says:

    I predicted this would happen. The prosecution never should have had that animal as the “Star Witness: Another example of the incompetant people working in the court system.

  5. Dave_D says:

    Asking a judge a question or for clarification is usually a waste of time. The judge, more often than not, just re-reads (help me here, Tsal, why isn’t it “reread”) the original instruction verbatim. This is like trying to make yourself understood in a foreign country by speaking louder. Judges are reluctant to modify or explain an instruction since they might be found to have committed error in the event of an appeal. The “model” instruction on “reasonable doubt” is based on an 1850 case! It basically says “I can’t define it but that doesn’t matter since you probably know what I mean”. It also uses terms like “moral certainty” – what the heck is that?

    @RGS9559 – The prosecution has to do the best he can with what he has. Often there are no witnesses or the witnesses that exist are pretty unsavory. Investigations are often botched by the time the prosecutor is involved.

    1. tsal-kv says:

      you have me stumped Dave – I’ve always omitted the hyphen and haven’t questioned it. I checked with the Purdue Owl which I use when in doubt and could not find a rule but notice it does not hyphenate reread. One rule of thumb was when in doubt eliminate. Another is something about using both words to see if they modify on their own. And there is a third rule I forget :)

      Either way I like your comment.

      1. Dave_D says:

        Thanks for the Purdue Owl reference! I visited and bookmarked (!) it.

  6. Willow says:

    I think what adds to the confusion for jurors is that they have a single charge for everything. Instead of one count for murder for each of the individuals killed, they have all of these counts for every little thing. That gets very confusing for some, especially if that person is very conscientious about their job as a juror.

    1. gramps says:

      I’ve been on ‘Jury Duty’ several times in my life. One of which was a ‘Murder Trial’….

      All seemed to have ‘one’ thing in common…..There was that one or two jurors that refused to use their ‘life experiences, combined with common sense & ‘Apply’ those tool’s to the evidence’ in order to reach a verdict…

      This small minority want a ‘slam dunk case’!…..As I recall the breakdown was 4 women & 1 man spread over 4 cases….

      They hailed fron ‘lace curtain, 2 toilet liberal towns’….!


      By the way, the ‘murder trial’…..GUILTY!

      1. tsal-kv says:

        gramps I have a fear of people sitting on a jury who decide without knowing any facts and have a propensity for stereotyping

      2. gramps says:

        Re-read my post, 2nd paragraph slowly….

        Evidence = FACTS!

      3. tsal-kv says:

        And you have all of the evidence the jury has – or is your evidence coming from news reports? Great source if you ask me. Again – you would be among my very LAST choice as a juror.

      4. Dave_D says:

        Gramps (“Evidence = FACTS!”): Actually, that isn’t so. If you had listened to the judge during your several jury services, you’d understand this.

        I realize that you don’t need the trial to know that the defendant is guilty, but it is good form to at least try to pay attention.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s