[Music] [Music] please the court defense and members of the jury it was 2 a.m. and the defendant was driving down South Monroe Street with no headlights what so we learned in today's trial that it wasn't just as simple as him forgetting the lights he didn't notice that his headlights were off for at least 5 and a half miles he didn't realize and when he was finally stopped by law enforcement his words tell us all that we needed to know from the start of course I've been at the club had a couple of drinks I've been at that I've been at that club I've been at Pockets Pool and Bar his words are all we need I bet how much yall want to bet since she's saying that she goes to the same place that she probably had a couple beers or you know a couple drinks and still drove home but we're not going to talk about that but it it's the fact that they're trying to like justify they say oh you know he had two drinks he probably had more they Bas trying to say he's alcoholic man B that's how they try to pursue the uh jury and I feel like this is the reason why they um they got like a not guilty well guilty and and I mean a lot of people said also had to do with you know his skin color too and I mean that may play play play a factor too cuz I don't know how T Housey Florida is I never been there honestly never plan to go there now I want to pause for a moment sustain I want to pause for a moment and thank you just hold on a second miss hery the state is just mistak the law for what is needed for driving Under the Influence please use the jury instructions that I presented to you as your instructions on the law May proceed I wanted to pause for a moment and just say thank you to everyone for being here I know we spent Tuesday all together going through jury selection and deciding who would be the best fit for our jury and throughout this process you've all been great we went through Friday and of course there were some delays and of course you also had to take time out of your day today which was not expected I feel that's another downfall when it comes to like jurries is that you know a lot of people do not want to be there and they want to like hurry up and get out so they just be making the quickest decision sometime just to like leave early because it was only supposed to be for one day and this thing carried from like Friday to Monday too so a lot of people wanted to leave so I'm pretty sure like their judgment was honestly not the best especially with this lady cuz she just trying to convince them that he's alcoholic and he was there like drinking like massively imp partying and to say the least we couldn't have gotten through this process without you so I commend you all for that and I'm beyond grateful for that so what I wanted to talk about is what the law is in this case and what we have to look to to see whether or not the state has met its burden as the judge just instructed us the defendant in this case he's charged with driving Under the Influence now driving Under the Influence has two two individual elements that the state had to prove to you here today first the def the the judge told us that the first element that the state needed to prove is that the defendant drove or he was in actual physical control of a vehicle now members of the jury I don't think this is something that's in dispute in this case we've seen the body wor warn camera we've seen testimony from two officers who told us here today that when they first encountered the defendant he was driving his vehicle down South Monroe Street the body warn camera footage that we saw on the televisions that are in front of you showed the defendant inside his white Mercedes when law enforcement approached him they showed him in the driver side seat behind the steering wheel and he was the only person in that vehicle so when we look at the evidence and the facts in this case we know that the state has in fact established the first element that he he was driving a motor vehicle so that brings us to the second element and this is the second element that you really are here today to decide see as the judge judge just told us while driving or an act the state must prove that while driving or an actual physical control of the vehicle Kelvin Riley the defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that his normal faculties were impaired now that element is a bit lengthy so I want to break it down into two separate parts starting with under the influence of alcoholic beverages we learned throughout today's trial that the defendant was undoubtedly under the influence of alcohol there was multiple things that we learn that through we learned that through his own admissions when officer MTH approached the vehicle let's go side park that's another thing too that they kept doing every time they said over Ru or whatever objection they had to go to side talk waste more of their time so like these people like the jury they probably wanted to hurry up man they G sit there talk talk talk talk talk you could hey statement so you couldn't have me in court bro I fall asleep I would man I couldn't that's why like I get picked for jury duty I find every excuse not to go because man I I know it's I just couldn't do it it's boring man but that that's basically what I'm saying like the jury people they're probably like wanted just to go home because most nobody really wants to be there and that's like the downside of like getting a jury you got some people that do you know want to that a lot of people just want to go home as I was previously stating the first element or the first part of this second element that we have to prove is that the defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages now when we look to the facts and the evidence in this case we know that there's several signs or several statements from the defendant that point us to the conclusion that he was under the influence that night for starters he admitted to officer mute at the scene that he had had a couple of drinks that night he told officer Muth that he was at a bar that night that he was out at a club how do we know he was out at the club well we saw The Wristband on his wrist that at that statement we know he was out drinking that night we know that he was out there and he left around the time that bars closed it was 2 in the morning so when we look at that element we would assert that it's been proven and if that's not enough we can also look to other things we can also consider whether or not his normal faculties were impaired and that's the second part of element two as the judge just instructed us normal faculties include multiple things it includes our ability to see so when we're talking about the defendant's ability to see that night there's several things that officers noted that were concerning my bad I didn't know it was muted and then she's going to bring up um the fact that he didn't have his headlights on but I mean sh man it be like that sometimes though bro you be leaving the store like you just be forget to have the headlights on and and if you're like in a very lit up city or town you know it's so light up you won't even notice until like you get to the country or like if you're behind like another car and you kind of maybe you know that's when you'll notice so she going to try to say you know he a have his headlights on so you know he he didn't know that his you know she's gonna try to like I said did she just persuading the jury to make it seem he was really drunk out of his mind and I don't think that was the case so let's talk through those starting with off Oliver officer Oliver told us here today that when she first saw the defendant he was driving down the road in his white Mercedes And as he was driving down the road he didn't have his headlights on like I mentioned earlier he was driving nearly 5 and 1/2 miles with no headlights and he couldn't see that it's dark outside it's 2: a.m. and you can't tell that you're driving down in the road in the dark what does common sense and reason tell us bro you cannot convince me that she hasn't had one time where she drove out and didn't have her headlights on we all did it before I'm just saying if it was a very lit up town you're just not going to notice but like I said that's what she's trying to persuade him and you know this is her job so I ain't going to knock her for it but it's just like come on like like you just knocking every you won't you just won't even mention about the bottle and that's literally what got him arrested see when we look at the jury instructions we see that when somebody's normal faculties are impaired it means that impairment is or impairment means that those normal faculties are diminished in some material respect and when you can't even tell that your headlights are off I think it's safe to say that your ability to see has been diminished and if that's not enough there's another part that we should talk about because when officer Oliver tried to tell the defendant about his headlights being off he didn't believe her he asked her are you sure about that I believe those were his words are you sure about that it took officer Oliver debating with the defendant about having his headlights off that she finally had to reach inside his vehicle and show him the Turning knob to turn them on he still didn't believe her until she finally clicked the knob to the right and showed him that they were off and it was and I feel like he had his fall lights on cuz in in the video I did see like some type of lights but I think it was his fog lights that he had on he didn't have his like actual lights so I think that's it was just honest mistake wasn't until the lights on his headlights finally illuminated that he fin widened his eyes and then turned to officer Oliver and still questioned her judgment and her ability to see that his headlights were in fact off it's not reasonable and the reason that we know that his sight was impaired was because of hiss to drinking alcohol that night so that brings us to another normal faculty that I wanted to discuss with you we listen to the defendant talk about or one of the additional normal faculties that we should consider during deliberations is the defendant's ability to talk that night now don't get me wrong here the video was sometimes a little hard to hear but then other times we know he was clear he was shouting he was yelling those times it was crystal clear how mean yeah cuz the [ __ ] was pissed off like like they try to use his like him talking [ __ ] as like him being literally drunk but bro you're pissed off like you're gonna be pissed off because they said that they smell weed and he ain't smoked so he just talking [ __ ] like she trying to just oh he's talking [ __ ] so you know he was really drunk out of his mind no that's just personality like if you going to lie lie on somebody they G to talk [ __ ] and call you out on it don't matter if you got a badge on it's just if you have a badge on if you talk [ __ ] to someone that has a badge on it's going to make it more hard and that's why I lo at the officer said oh he a want to work with us so we're going tow his [ __ ] and when we watched those videos here in court today it was clear that there were times that he was and don't forget that they was laughing the entire time when they was arresting him too let's not forget that part either his words he was not making sense for example when AAR Oliver stopped him in his vehicle he said why you slow me down is that and it this is something that kind of made me bad because a lot of people just say says like that like why you slow me down that does mean stop like if you you in a certain area like you know people have slangs and stuff and they say different words it's not a abnormal thing like a lot of people do that that a statement that makes sense no but that was what was running through his head at that time why you slow me down so we have to look at his I mean it's just like the fact it's just slang it's it's just slang the [ __ ] like bro I could not be on jury I'll be I'll be say too much Al bir they'll kick me out speech in those moments and whether or not we think based on his speech that it was diminished in some material respect so let's talk about another one now the defendant's ability to judge distances members of the jury this is a big one and I encourage you to remember the demonstrative that I showed during the testimony of Officer mute so I want to turn that on for you thought and I believe she's showing the map but you know we won't be able to see it this is a map it's just for the uh jury's eyes of the defendant's route that night based on his own admissions like I originally stated when he was first stopped by Officer Oliver first he says oh I'm just going home I'm going to West forvard Street well that didn't make sense because as officer Oliver told us on the stand yet on Friday he was heading the opposite direction so are you and this is why it's so important that you do not tell officers where you're going or where you're coming from because they will use that against you especially if you try to take it to court they're going to use a lot of stuff against you and it's going to be like you know you could have just lied and just not told him the truth of where you was really going he could have been going to a girl's house or going to get some food or something you know he a had to tell us so he could have just made up a lie too that's why like when they ask questions just don't say nothing cuz they will use it against you unfortunately and it will like if you trying to like you know take it to court or something if it's like find it for your freedom it can't be used against you that's why it's always good just not to say nothing and just wait for a lawyer or just don't say nothing really going home if you're going completely the opposite direction I think not so now let's look at the other perspective cuz after after all officer Oliver gets to the scene offer MTH as she told us went and did her own independent investigation she told us here today that she went up to the defendant and asked him where are you going where were you planning on going he said he was going home and when she asked where are you coming from she said I was com he said I was coming from P or pockets and as we learned in today's trial pockets is a local bar here in Tallahassee located on the North Side so when you look at that map that we showed you during today's trial you can see that the route just doesn't make sense and his ability to judge distances was materially diminished right here on this map we see Pockets pull in Hub if we're taking the defendant own W happen that night that means he would have traveled south on South Monroe Street all the way down to the intersection of South Monroe Street and Laura Lee I'm curious actually if we're taking the defendant's own and his ability to judge distances was materially diminished right here on this map we see Pockets pull in h if we're taking the defendant on work what happened that night that means he would have traveled south on South Monroe Street all the way down he took another route cuz West lar street is like a little bit down so what is she trying to say or pockets and as we learned in today's trial pockets is a local bar here in Tallahassee located on the North side so when you look at that map that we showed you during today's trial you can see that the route just doesn't make sense and his ability to judge distances was materially diminished what was the r she said he took because as officer Oliver told us on the stand yet on Friday he was heading the opposite direction so are you and I encourage you to remember the demonstrative that I showed during the testimony of Officer mute so I want to turn that on for you guys this is a map of the defendant's route that night based on his own admissions like I originally stated when he was first stopped by Officer Oliver distances was materially diminished but like I said bro like they just trying to make it seem like he was going the opposite way but I he could have just been taking any route but that's what I'm saying they ask you questions just don't say anything because they will use that against you sadly and if you trying to take it to court or anything they will they will really use that against you no matter what especially when it come especially like I said you're fighting for your life or something but like I said she just trying to convince the jury that this dude was like drunk and out his mind and everything to this jury just to get that uh verdict but it's her job though but let's continue right here on this his own resence yesing by his own residence passing by the home he said he was heading to objection your honor facts on evidence May yes was saying now I'm sorry for the pause in there but I wanted to get back to what I was saying members of the jury as we saw in today's trial he would have started at Pockets Pool and puff all the way up in the north side here in Tallahasse if we take the defendant's own word for what happened that night he would have traveled well past his home address well past that West Bard Street address that he kept telling officers about that night all the way down until he got to Laura Lee and South Monroe's intersection that's where law enforcement finally stopped him because he didn't have his headlights on and that's finally where they stopped him and who knows how much further he would have gone before law enforcement do in that night and like I showed y'all the map it's not that far distance so he honestly could have just went to go get some food or it's just like it's say none of their business he and I really that's why I really just encourag like just don't say anything because they gonna say anything under the moon to especially to convince this jury that hey you know he he was drunk and this and you know he's guilty it's not clear but it clearly wasn't in the direction of his home because if he was heading home he would have to turn all the way around and go the exact same way North back to his ad [Applause] so members of the JY when we're talking about the defendant's ability to judge distances we know that his ability to do so was diminished in some material respect absolutely the jury instructions also say that normal faculties include your ability to drive in automobile that's another thing that we heard about in today's trial not only the lack of headlights but also officer Oliver told us about his driving pattern when she went to stop him he was speeding down South Monroe Street at least 10 miles hey you know what's crazy about this entire case they said he was speeding and swering but they got no video of him swerving they don't even have the radar to even catch his speed even even with the alcohol that they never even like tested his blood everything is off words this entire case who knows maybe potentially more we don't know because officer Oliver didn't have a speed gun to tell us you see what I'm talking about exactly how far but based on her training and experience she was able to assess that he was speeding that night now he wasn't just speeding off words he was speeding past two police cars with one of them that at least had their headlights on does that make sense to drive over the speed limit as he's passing a police car with its headlights its emergency lights activated you can't miss that but he was speeding we also learned that in addition to the speeding he was swerving officer Oliver got on the stand and told us about how her she was concerned based on how he was operating his motor vehicle see when he was in the left hand turine there was a right hand or sorry when he was in the left hand or the left hand lane there was a vehicle coming up on the side of him in the right Officer Oliver told us here on Friday that while he was passing this vehicle on the right he started swerving and although he didn't Collide he could have an almost hit that vehicle his ability I don't get why his lawyers ain't saying objection because there's no video of him doing that there's no video of him swerving or any this is all off words none of it is proven there's no I need to see video and they ain't got it MERS of the jury to drive an automobile safely was diminished the next one talks about the ability to make judgments and this is another thing that we've talked about in two different respects first when law enforcement asks the defendant to complete a breath test now we learned about the consequences of refusal of a breath test here in Florida officer M read to us here today the exact same thing that she to the defendant not once but twice that here in Florida if you refuse to submit to a breath test your driving privileges will be suspended for an entire year an entire year and officer mute as she's telling the defendant hey your driving license privileges are going to be suspended for this long he doesn't care he doesn't say sure this is I know this is a big misunderstanding let me let me show you I'm not impaired let me show you that I'm not under the influence of the AL of alcohol objection your honor burning shiing sustained be careful this is called something this is called consciousness of guilt and we can think of it as something as simple as Thanksgiving dinner see at Thanksgiving we go to our family's house we eat all the the food that we can green beans stuffing turkey mashed potatoes gravy the whole nine yards but if we go to the trainer the next day at the gym and they say hey can you get on that scale can you tell us what how much you weigh we're not going to do it because we know what that scale is going to say we know that it's going to say we gained weight and that's just the reality of it the fact that she's bringing Thanksgiving into this is freaking wild we don't want to see that number we don't want our personal trainer to see that number well that's the same she trying to she really try to compare or you eat at Thanksgiving and you get fat and then you go to your personal trainer you're gonna be embarrassed because like he know you ate she's trying to compare that to him drinking like bro man they be reaching whenever they doing especially to the jury man they try to convince you any way possible to even bring up Thanksgiving as an example as it applies here in this case he didn't want law enforcement he didn't want us to see what his breath alcohol content was that night and I can tell you that there's six reasons why he didn't want us to see that his breath alcohol content was above the legal limit he did not want us to know that he was under the influence and that's because he knew he was guilty he knew he was drinking alcohol that night and that's the reality of it the next part of normal faculties being impaired is the ability to act in emergencies now I understand that a traffic stop might not at first glance sound like an emergency per se but when we assess how somebody behaves at a traffic stop we can assess their ability to also react in times of emergency see when we watched the body warn camera in this trial we saw that the defendant was very adamant about wanting his phone that night in fact officer MTH officer Oliver told us that this repeated statement can actually indicate impairment but that's besides the point because again we're talking about his ability to act an Emer he wanted his phone that night to call his lady according to him and officers of course at first weren't going to give him his phone they're trying to transport him from his vehicle over to the other Patrol vehicle but when officer Oliver finally went up to him and said hey I've got your phone can I make a phone call for you can I help you call your lady no I don't want any of that he didn't want any of that at that point he wanted to continue to yell Shout and scream he wanted to talk over the law enforcement officers and that's what he wanted to do he didn't want his girl to come and pick up his car he didn't want that he couldn't even decide whether or not to have his car towed versus having a loved one come pick it up now that's that's complete cap because she saying that he he couldn't decide it the officers decided for him when they're like he didn't want to work with us so we're going to tow it and that speaks to his ability to act in an emergency his ability to react in response to somebody else couldn't even make up his own mind lastly the jury instructions mentioned the ability to perform the many mental and phys physical acts of our daily lives now we've covered several things of this sort we've covered his inability to assess that his headlights were off his inability to assess the fact that he was speeding we talked about about how he couldn't make judgments but there's a few other things I want you to remember when you enter the deliberation room see we saw the video footage of Officer Oliver when she first approached the defend we saw how when she asked him for his driver's license and his registration he was unable to produce those things it took him several moments to finally find something with his name on it he was up on the top of his vehicle fumbling flipping through papers couldn't find anything that usually happens when you're not really organized that happens to the best of us it's not unnormal not even a driver's license not his car registration not his insurance nothing that's something we should be able to do in our everyday lives when the law enforcement says can I have your driver's license in registration but the defendant couldn't even do that members of the jury I said during opening statements that the facts would guide you and the evidence would guide you throughout today's case there's been a lot of distractions throughout this trial about an un unsealed liquor bottle and things of that sort but I want you to remember that in this case that liquor bottle is not evidence in you would think that she would bring the liquor bottle up in the beginning not towards the end this DUI trial that liquor bottle is not evidence in this DUI trial in this trial for determining whether or not the defendant was under the influence the evidence is his signs of impairment the evidence is his admission to law enforcement saying he was at the club that night at pocket pool in Pub admitted to having a few drinks and when we talk about two not a few you see what I'm saying bro she really trying to convince them and she she's like stretching the story out his a mission of having a few drinks that night we also have to remember that's all he was willing to admit cuz like officer MTH told us here today it's not uncommon in a DUI investigation for a DUI suspect to underestimate to law enforcement how much they actually drank the facts are simple he was driving a motor vehicle he was under the influence he admitted to drinking alcohol he admitted to being out a bar and he couldn't find his documents he couldn't operate his vehicle he couldn't find that his headlights were out and I cannot emphasize these facts enough members of the jury because it is clear so when you go into the deliberation room ask you to do one thing don't get sidetracked by distractions go in there and look at the elements of this offense and look at the evidence look at it with a close eye because when you do that the facts are going to become Crystal Clear you'll know the truth you've seen the truth in this trial and the truth is that the defendant is guilty thank you and that was her closing arguments and in the next video I'll post the U his attorney's closing arguments to the jury and then the verdict and then but overall like that's that's basically what they're trying to do they well they did just convinced them that he was like drunk because he came from the bar and that's why I always said like you don't got to tell them where you're going or anything or answer any questions because they will use that against you and it will be pretty bad and you know it's kind of funny how she did mention about the liquor bottle but she saved it towards the end but it's like it wasn't used as evidence but in the video you could clearly see that's the first thing that they mention and that's what they used to like really go that's what they did bro it's it's in video and they're just trying to just like dust that over but my question is like who else did that obiously did that to I mean they did say this was like her first DUI but I don't know and I don't I don't feel like he should have got that verdict but y'all y'all tell me what y'all think about the state's uh closed arguments and what they said about him and y'all be honest though and y'all have a wonderful day