Teenager acquitted of killing 2 people
James Daughtery spent 2 years in jail after his arrest
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Seventeen-year-old James Daughtery embraced his lawyer as a judge read from a verdict form Friday afternoon, declaring him innocent of two brutal homicides that have kept him in prison for more than two years. ...
Several of Daughtery's family members stifled cheers and sobs as Stucky read the verdict Friday, and excused themselves from the courtroom as the boy exchanged a long hug with his lawyer, Rico Moore.
"Happy is not a strong enough word," Moore said of his client.
Prosecutors alleged that on Feb. 10, 2010, enraged that Daughtery had allegedly sold them fake crack, Duling and Pontier left several messages on his phone, calling him racial slurs and demanding their money back.
Prosecutors said Daughtery, then 15, arranged to meet the two near the Fas-Chek in Kanawha City. He jumped into the back of Duling's car, pulled out a .22 Peacemaker revolver, and shot both Pontier and Duling in the head, prosecutors said.
During the trial, prosecutors relied on testimony from Daughtery's friend, Mark Artez "Ace" Johnson, who told investigators that Daughtery had bragged to him about the crime soon after he committed it, claiming that he had "earned his stripes" as a drug runner.
On the witness stand, though, Johnson asked the judge several times if he could "plead the Fifth," or decline to answer questions for fear of self-incrimination -- especially when prosecutors asked him if he had used the phone he shared with Daughtery to make drug deals.
Johnson mumbled most of his answers to prosecutors and to Moore on cross-examination....
Thus, Charleston has its own case of a controversy in justice which is being overlooked. It is a Trayvon-type case, but in reverse and twice as bad, while the public and media are too quiet about the outcome. It was the double-murder of two white men while the only probable and potential perpetrator was Daughtery, a fifteen year old black male (at the time), who was declared "not guilty". The Gazette, in the typical fashion of the agenda-driven national liberal media, has contributed to the injustice of the case by inserting their own very slanted and bias report. Zac Taylor's article ascribed that Daughtery was declared "innocent" (a distortion and reporters misrepresentation, very different than what the judge said) while also painting him as the victim instead of the two deceased. More than that, any reactions of the real victim's families were either omitted or redacted, neither of which reflects objective journalism or the whole truth about the verdict for unbias readers. Why?
While "happy is not a strong enough term" for Daughtery the reporter's back was turned away from any cries of the true victims' families (whether they were present or not). Emotions expressed, as police know too well, are not indicative of any righteous judgment, but only reflect personal self-interest. Imagine if you were a family member of the two murder victims what your reaction might be as contrasted to that of Daughtery and friends.
The damning fact is this, that the police have no other suspect "at large". The key witness "Ace" Johnson ("Daughtery's friend" reports Zac Taylor!) no doubt perjured himself in his "mumbling" testimony in order to stay alive (the drug cartel would certainly avenge the conviction for murder of their young drug "mule", which Daughtery could threaten him with to coerce him to shut up in court) while the defense looked the other way and the Gazette bought the whole story as an exoneration since they see it their duty to help in perpetuating the myth of white prejudice against blacks in crime, as if color instead of behavior were criminal evidence. (Certainly if the suspect is white and the victim black the Gazette is likely to see the suspect as guilty, no jury trial needed; e.g. Zimmerman vs. Trayvon).
What if a white guy who had a witness that said he "bragged" about a murder, of two black men, and that he had "earned his stripes as a drug runner"--but then the witness suddenly reversed himself, two years later, in court? What, pray tell, would have been the Gazette's reaction then!! Al Sharpton would have come to town, with all national networks in tow, with one voice crying "injustice", would they not?
But we all know better and so does everyone else on the street along with the prosecutors and police we pay to enforce justice in Charleston. The silence, along with the hypocrisy in context of the Treyvon controversy, is deafening. But the blood of those two murdered victims, who were truly shot "execution" style (a proven fact in this case), cries loudly up to a God in heaven for avenging of their blood (though they are not to be compared to innocent Abel in Genesis whom Cain killed in history's first murder), for which government is to be a minister of justice for the Divine Judge, even in a state which has disarmed itself of the Sword of Justice (see Romans 13) for the death penalty.
The fact that the police and prosecutors are not calling it an "unsolved" crime ("they had their man") underlines the injustice of the trial's outcome of which the public has every right to be highly suspicious about and unaccepting of it. Juries, especially with the evident perjury of a key witness, with a high standard of proof required, are not and cannot be infallible when a key witness bails on the prosecution after two years of consideration. (One wonders however about the prosecutor's case, whether physical exhibits, particularly ballistics or gun powder residue were ever found on the suspect's person or clothing, which would have been "beyond reasonable doubt" of guilt if available. Is this where the police and/or prosecution failed the case?)
But the Gazette has trumpeted the outcome between their very bias lines as "justice", painting Daughtery as if he were a victim of what is labeled "white justice", while the shedding of blood of two men by someone carrying out their own arbitrary "death penalty" for personal satisfaction (all murder is a 'hate crime') remains at large and free. Though evidently the editor had Zac Taylor give due credit to the same prosecutor, Mark Plants, for not even charging a black man who shot two other white men in St. Albans recently in "self defense" (though we know others who said he left his property and went to confront the other men, packing a weapon with a permit, for their dangerous driving in the neighborhood with children present), the article's message implied a "white prejudice" mark upon the police and prosecution while the only probable perpetrator, with motive, means, and opportunity, walks free. This is "Treyvon" media bias all over again, based solely upon age and the color of the skin instead of evidence which was, until the trial, as hard as concrete. Where is the outrage? What about "Ace" Johnson's sudden and incredible about-face in testimony?
Anarchy and vigilantism based upon any prejudice (prejudging without evidence) will be the rule if the principles of jurisprudence are abandoned for irresponsible reporting and inflammatory racially charged, incindiary speeches before the public (e.g. Al Sharpton) and this type of media-fomented activism which is presently inciting civil disturbance, and even violence, in Florida. Even in Charleston some have taken to the streets over the Trayvon case (this is political insanity and radical activism outside of its proper jurisdiction) while the double-murder of two white men, "execution style", locally by the only probable suspect, now released, is met with strange silence! Is that not troubling? Will West Virginia media do any investigative reporting? Of course not. The suspect was a black youth instead of a white man, and would be met with (unjust) accusations of "racism", which the cowardly media avoids at all costs.
The High Court of heaven surely has judged differently than the hand-tied Judge and Jury on this double-murder case and so will any thoughtful public opinion. Meanwhile we might need a new Paper for justice to make its case to the public. While Justice is blindfolded to color certainly the Gazette is not, but portrays her as needing to peek in order to shift her balance and recalibrate her scales for a particular outcome. It's almost as if a double murder never took place, as if to have no conviction of anyone is "justice".
We know full well that not all 15 year old black youths (or white) are harmless and "innocent" but in fact are fully capable of murder, as news reports prove. The gross presumption that a young black youth could not have pulled the trigger where the evidence is clear that drug-dealing was involved (where money and guns are always present) is to be selectively and deliberately naive. Was Daughtery a drug-runner or not? Did he sell to the two victims or not? It will take more than a journalistic "hoodie" of an article to cover up his character and behavior! Did the prosecution paint a rational scenario based upon facts or was it their own fantasy? Let the unbias reader decide.
The public should be alarmed and crying out that Justice has not been done in this case! And that West Virginia certainly needs a death Penalty. A cold blooded, double-murder cannot go unpunished, and the murder rate is going up.
For now The Gazette and Zac Taylor need to take a lesson in objective journalism from this excellent reporter from the Miami Herald involved in the Trayvon case (see interview on CNN below), who has dared to report the uncomfortable truth from all angles, instead of their blatant partial coverage: 
Posts
