On Wednesday, August 9, closing arguments were heard from the prosecution and the defense in the trial of Jason Stockley, who killed Anthony Lamar Smith, 24, in December of 2011 while on duty as a St. Louis police officer. The trial rested on one question: Did the manner in which Stockley killed Smith qualify as murder?
The prosecution team, led by former public defender Robert Steele, contended that Stockley committed deliberate, premeditated murder, and even planted a gun in Smith’s car to provide false justification for his crime.
The defense, led by Neil Bruntrager, said that Stockley acted in self-defense and that his use of force, as a police officer, was legally justifiable.
The prosecution asked the judge that Stockley be convicted of first-degree murder. The decision rests on Judge Timothy Wilson alone, because Stockley waived his right to a jury trial. Instead, since the courtroom remained close to entirely full throughout the trial, and especially in the last few days, the media were put in the jury box.
“The evidence that we have presented has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Stockley is guilty of first-degree murder,” Steele said in his closing argument. “Mr. Stockley has acknowledged that he made the statement, ‘We’re going to kill this [expletive].’ And 45 seconds later, he put five bullets in him.”
In testimony on August 8, Stockley did agree that he said that, as captured on video in his squad car, though he said that he didn’t remember what prompted him to do so.
In the event that Judge Wilson decides there isn’t enough evidence of deliberation on Stockley’s part for a first-degree murder charge, the prosecution requested a charge of second-degree murder, or, failing that, voluntary or involuntary manslaughter.
“We’ve given the court a smorgasbord of options,” said Steele. “But all of those options come from the buffet of guilt.”
Steele repeated a statement he had used frequently during the trial: “The video don’t lie.”
Stockley’s defense team concurred. In his closing statement, Bruntrager said, “I agree. The video don’t lie.” But what they saw in the video was different from what the prosecution saw.
Instead of a premeditated execution, they saw a man protecting himself in a high-stress, possibly fatal situation. They said that Stockley was afraid, and that for him, killing Smith could be explained by the feelings he was experiencing during the car chase.
“It’s stress, it’s anxiety, it’s tension, it’s fear, and those are human responses,” said Bruntrager. He said Stockley was simply fulfilling his duty as a police officer when he and his partner, Officer Brian Bianchi, engaged in a car chase with Smith around the Walnut Park area, at speeds reaching up to 87 miles per hour.
“It is their duty to stop him,” argued Bruntrager. “It is an unpleasant job, but we ask them to perform that job.” Stockley had to do whatever it took to put Smith in custody, the defense said, because he believed he was dangerous.
If they let him get away, Bruntrager said, “what will happen next time?” He asked the judge to see things from his client’s point of view: “We have to rely on what he reasonably believed, even if that belief is wrong.”
Stockley reasonably believed, the defense claimed, that Smith had a gun. The prosecution countered that by saying that another “reasonable” person was on the scene the whole time: Bianchi.
Bianchi’s actions, as evidenced in both the dashcam video and a citizen’s cell phone video, were almost exactly the opposite of Stockley’s. In the Church’s Chicken parking lot, after approaching and examining Smith’s fleeing car, Bianchi holstered his gun and returned to his vehicle. Stockley chased down the moving vehicle on foot, firing seven shots towards its back windshield.
“[Stockley’s] belief was not reasonable,” said Steele. “Because he’s standing next to his partner, and his partner holsters his weapon.”
The two got in their police Tahoe and sped after Smith. On the dashcam video, Stockley can be heard urging Bianchi along—“Get him” he said, and eventually, “Hit him! Hit him now!”
Again, at the scene of the crash, Bianchi holstered his weapon, and Stockley kept his out. Within the next 15 seconds, Stockley had shot Smith through the driver’s side window of his car.
“It all comes down to those 15 seconds,” said Bruntrager.
In his closing argument, he went over the 18 witnesses called by the prosecution: DNA analysts, FBI employees, firearms specialists, officers who responded to the scene, and civilians who witnessed it. None of those witnesses could conclusively prove that Stockley had planted a gun in Smith’s car, said Bruntrager – only that the .38 revolver which Stockley retrieved from Smith’s car had traces of Stockley’s own DNA on it, but not Smith’s.
Bruntrager referenced the VonDerrit Myers Jr. case – in which the prosecution stated that it is “rare” to find DNA on a gun – as part of his argument that Smith could have had the gun without leaving DNA on it. The only evidence supporting that is the fact that Stockley found the gun in Smith’s car.
To that, Steele responded that there are “thousands” of people in prison convicted on DNA evidence. If DNA was good enough evidence to convict them, he argued, it should be good enough to convict a police officer, too. Though Bruntrager claimed that DNA evidence has limits, Steele said, “It don’t have no limits for anyone else.”
Judge Wilson announced that each side has until August 18 to file a written statement, listing reasons why they believe their side should prevail. Neither side is required to file that statement, but he will not make a decision until they have had the opportunity to do so.
