BOSTON (AP) — A Boston jury deadlocked on the case of two men accused of gunning down three adults and a toddler during a drug robbery has voted to return for a seventh day.

Jurors first told the judge on Monday they were deadlocked 11-1 on nine of 10 charges in the case. On Wednesday afternoon, she asked them to vote whether to continue since she couldn’t order them again to keep deliberating. The jurors said they all agreed to return Thursday.

Dwayne Moore and Edward Washington face murder and other charges for the September 2010 shootings in the city’s Mattapan neighborhood. One victim survived and is paralyzed.

During the nearly month-long trial, defense lawyers challenged the credibility of the prosecution’s key witness, who admitted taking part in the robbery, but said he left before the shootings.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.

Comments (16)
  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 – out of curiosity – are you sitting on this jury……if you are not, how do you have the knowledge to say one way or the other what is happening? All I can say is darned glad we live in a country where we are not convicted by bloggers.

      1. gramps says:

        Experience = Knowledge….


        In my reading of your many posts, I’d put you in the ‘slam dunk’ category of jurors….&….All five times, I totally enjoyed making them look like ‘fool’s’ in the jury room!

      2. tsal-kv says:

        gramps I have a feeling that it may not be the other jurors who look like fools… you even know if I’ve served on a jury and if so if it’s been more times than you have.

      3. gramps says:

        Do tell us what you learned…

        Can’t wait!

      4. tsal-kv says:

        Gramps You seem to feel you are the only person here with the experience and therefore the knowledge. Why assume that escapes me – hence my 11:43 question.

        Please reread the last part of my 11:43 post SLOWLY. For your benefit, perhaps this helps: I asked if you know whether I have served on a jury and if so how many times.

        However, if your claim is correct and experience does equal knowledge I can say that in my 60 plus years I have learned that any person who honestly believes he makes fools of others and is proud of it is more than likely making a fool of himself.

        The bottom line is you do not know the facts other than what you have heard in the media and you are therefore not qualified to judge – any more than any of the rest of us. It’s that simple.

    2. Dave_D says:

      Perhaps those one or two jurors had life experiences that were very different than yours and consequently didn’t share your “common sense”.

      Perhaps you can explain why gender or the number of toilets in a town is worthy of note. (I suppose if I lived in a “two toilet” town, I’d at least have learned the virtue of patience. – do residents need to make reservations or is there a line?)

      1. gramps says:

        Lawyers will always try to make their clients look innocent, wouldn’t harm a fly, sinless, virtuous & if possible ‘child like’….

        If they’re successful, this ‘might’ cause one or more of the women to start ‘Lactating’, they become sympathetic & they’ll want to mother him/her….

        Opening the door for a ‘HUNG JURY’!


      2. tsal-kv says:

        Dave_D – because he says so

    3. gramps says:

      You’re being ‘ANAL’, as usual….SO, I’ll re-ask & word the question!

      “Do tell us what you learned…FROM YOUR JURY DUTY EXPERIENCE”!

  2. Rob Cleary says:

    Looks like a jury of their peers is just that. A jury of Dimwits.

  3. Don says:

    Juries should not have mob or peer pressure mentality. The fact that they agree to return once again speaks volumes of the system. There is an element of personal conscience that lives on long after the trial and sentencing is over for those making decisions before the judgement and penalty is issued.

    Does 9 of 10 mean none stick? Home runs are not always guaranteed.

    1. Tsal&kv says:

      Nicely said Don.

  4. Willow says:

    There must be good reason why one person is holding out on this jury. Not everything in life is slam dunk. Since none of us are in that deliberating room, we can’t judge the motive of the single juror. Has anyone ever seen the movie, 12 Angry Men? Since we don’t know what issue is at question here, we need to sit and wait and hope justice prevails in the end.

    1. tsal&kv says:

      You are absolutely correct as always!

    2. gramps says:

      As I previously posted on another BZ blog:

      Lawyers will always try to make their clients look innocent, wouldn’t harm a fly, sinless, virtuous & if possible ‘child like’….

      If they’re successful, this ‘might’ cause one or more of the women to start ‘Lactating’, they become sympathetic & they’ll want to mother him/her….

      Opening the door for a ‘HUNG JURY’!


      tsal & willow along with others of their ‘Ilk’ need to review there ‘liberal leanings’….Maybe ‘less time’ in Church & more time paying attention to the world around them would have served them better….?

      I wonder how many ‘bridges’ they’ve bought???

Leave a Reply

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

More From CBS Boston

Opioid Crisis
Download Our App

Watch & Listen LIVE