when i came past the living room, my oldest son said, mom, shea has been shot. i tried to do cpr, and i tried to get her to awaken to my responses. >> and was she responding to you? >> no, she wasn't. >> her 9-year-old daughter not responding because she had been shot in the neck. a bullet from an ak-47. prosecutors say now this man was the one who wielded that weapon. he has been charged with her murder. live testimony today as "in session" takes you "courtside." good wednesday morning to all of you. i'm jack ford it is the prosecution side of this case playing out in miami, florida a 9-year-old girl playing in front of her home gets caught in the middle of a gun battle and takes a bullet to the neck. two people were charged, one has pled guilty, agreed to testify for the prosecution against the man who is now on trial, the prosecutor says he was the one that pulled an ak-47 and started firing. beth karas takes a closer look. >> it's not easy when you lose a loved one. >> david jenkins daughter was playing outside her home in a miami housing project when a gun battle erupted nearby. 9-year-old sherdavia was struck by a bullet from an ak-47. her death causing outrage in a neighborhood already riddled with violence. >> i'm asking everyone, if you know something, please come forward. take back your community. take it back before it is too far gone and too late. >> two men were charged with second degree murder in the girl's death. prosecutors say leroy larose and damon darling were involved in the shootout and it was darling, they claim that fired the fatal shot. defense attorney jonathan meltz claims his client shot in self-defense. >> what are you supposed to do? if faced by a barrel of a gun, you can run, get shot in the back, beg for your life or meet force with force. >> larose pleaded guilty to second degree murder and agreed to testify against darryling in exchange for only seven years behind bars. darling could face a life sentence if convicted. but for the parents of little sherdavia, that is of little consolation. >> why you took my baby? she didn't do nothing wrong. >> this tragedy playing out inside of this miami courthouse. they are not yet ready to start with testimony it should be momentarily. beth karas will fill us in on everything. good morning to you before we get to a recap of yesterday, let me ask to you set the stage. when do we expect testimony to get started? do we have any idea where it will be going for the prosecution today? >> well, we don't know exactly who will be called except the very first witness is the continuation from yesterday, witness number 5, arnold yen, a crime scene technician on cross examination. he was when court broke yesterday. i expect more police witnesses, and in the next day or two, today or tomorrow, probably leroy larose, the one-time co-defendant will testify along with the lead detective, romando garcia. >> yesterday opening statements, give us an idea what did the prosecution have to say and what did the defense have to say about a defense here? >> well, each side spoke pretty briefly, 10, 12 minutes. monica gordo for the prosecution. monica gordo is a walking sound bite. she was very powerful to the jury. describing that traumatic day when little sherdavia jenkins basically died in her mother's lap in the threshold of her home. she sort of educated the jury a bit about why stand your ground defense, a type of self-defense does not apply in this case. which is that -- which is damon darling's defense, that he did not have a means to retreat to safety, that he actually provoked this situation which caused the shootout with leroy larose, and it was the bullet from the gun that darling was wielding, an ak-47 that killed sherdavia jenkins. jonathan meltz in his opening statement said it was leroy larose who provoked the situation and that darling was s simply making a choice between life and death and he chose life. >> an interesting issue arose yesterday. i'm looking into the courtroom, i can see the defendant is there talking with his lawyers. we still have a bit of time to talk. they are standing because the judge is heading in, but the jurors are not there. let me ask you quickly about this issue, and it had to do with a detective involved on this case on a television show what was that about? >> yes, i don't think we heard the end of this issue either. the hearing was held after the jury left yesterday, the lawyers were to work on it overnight. a&e's show, "the first 48" featured this case. and it has aired several times in its hour-long show there were two different cases featured in the hour-long. this was half of one of those shows it was called "innocence lost. "and romando garcia and a few other detectives are in this video talking about the first hours of this investigation, the whom point is the first 48 hours of a homicide investigation are critical and it is portrayed to the public that arrests were made in the first 48 hours, but we know that's not true. there's a lot of fiction in this, the prosecution conceded that saying, look, if the defense wants to cross examine my lead detective in this case about that show and his participation, because it was made during the pendancy of this case, he should not be allowed to ask him anything about what the narrator says. there's fiction in this. it's not reality except the big picture that these two men were charged with killing sherdavia and where it happened. she said it should be limit to the police interrogation which the first 48 had copies of. darling was videotaped on the day he was arrested, which was three weeks after, not the first 48 in that "the first 48" episode there is a portion of tape, clearly from the police interrogation. it's the same room. it's the police interrogation. "the first 48" aired it but the defense never received it from the police. so "the first 48" are believed to be rolling and recording on a separate tape. for some reason they recorded something that the police didn't, that has jonathan meltz concerned. he did not know about this portion of the interrogation that has occurred un -- that it was tape recorded until he saw it on tv. so the judge will allow questioning about that. and it is the police interrogation. and what he saw is not -- the detective didn't do anything wrong. he lied -- he is lying to darling when he says we know the other guy is trying to kill you, you shot in self-defense, i'm paraphra paraphrasing, you tell us what happened. then darling tells us what was happening, that he was firing in self-defense and wielding an ak-47. for some reason the police didn't record that or turn it over. that's a concern. that's what we will hear during the cross examination of garcia. >> raises an interesting issue. you and i both have been prosecutors. we know the rules allow investigators to essentially fabricate things when they're talking to suspects. how often has a detective walked into a room and said your buddy down the hall has just given you up. the first one to sign a statement here is going to be the one who gets the better deal. the reality is the buddy down the hall has not given anybody up or talked at all. courts have said that's okay. my question is, i don't know if we know the answer yet t seems like it would be a secucurious e to have a detective say to this defendant to get him to talk we know you were shooting in self-defense, when that's entirely inconsistent with the prosecutor's argument that he was the initiator. he started this gunfight. raises some interesting issues in the court, does it not? >> yes, it does. i suspect that the detective will say we are allowed to say things that we don't believe in order to elicit. but he's eliciting the defense. darling is putting himself at the scene and an ak-47 in his hands. so that's pretty gfrmt. >> certainly a different issue. if i'm the defense attorney, i will argue, look, even the lead investigator believes he was operating in self-defense. gives the defense something to talk about stand by for a minute, if you will. looking inside the courtroom, they are in the midst of a sidebar conference. it's been a pretty prolonged one. it's a good time to fit our first break in here, this way when we come back hopefully they will be ready with live testimony and we can get you back inside of the courtroom. (pouring rain) i had a great time. me too. you know, i just got out of a bad relatio... it's okay. thanks. goodnight. goodnight. (door crashes in, alarm sounds) get out! (phone rings) hello? this is rick with broadview security. is everything all right? no, my ex-boyfriend just kicked in the front door. i'm sending help right now. thank you. (announcer) brink's home security is now broadview security. call now to install the standard system for just $99. the proven technology of a broadview security system delivers rapid response from highly-trained professionals, 24 hours a day. call now to get the $99 installation, plus a second keypad installed free. and, you could save up to 20% on your homeowner's insurance. call now-- and get the system installed for just $99. broadview security for your home or business - the next generation of brink's home security. call now. when is the next time you looked up? >> when i heard gunshots. >> where was the man with dreads at that point. >> going away from us. >> where did your friend go. >> in her house. >> where did you go. >> my house. >> what about shea? >> she tried to run, but she didn't make it. >> so some very troubling testimony from the sister of the victim in this case. they were playing together out in front of her home. as she said, her sister didn't make it. she took a bullet in the neck fired by a man carrying an ak-47. they're about to get the jury inside of the courtroom here in florida gives us a chance to introduce our guests, some of our favorites, jennifer barringer, criminal defense attorney, focuses on forensics work, part of phil spector's defense team. and criminal defense attorney, paul martin, also a former prosecutor, well-known criminal defense attorney in new york. handled a number of high-profile cases. inside of the courtroom, jurors have been brought in, this after an interesting exchange where the judge came out on the bench without the jurors there saying her rules of protocol had been violated that somebody in the courtroom had gone against the conduct rules and ordered that person removed from the courtroom. that person apparently was affiliated in some fashion, we don't know if it was a direct family or friend of the defendant. she was escorted out and told she was not allowed back inside of the courtroom. let's go back live inside of the courtroom. >> all right. very well. we are ready to proceed. i believe the next witness or is it the same witness we will recall from yesterday? >> yes, judge, it's the continuation of crime scene technician arnold yen. >> very well. >> crime scene technician being called back to the stand. an important witness for the prosecution. began his testimony yesterday. going back to the chair. one of the things he did importantly was establish various locations within the shooting area, lines of sight and also shooting lines. obviously important to the prosecution as they try to establish that it was this defendant carrying the ak-47 that fired the bullet that struck and killed the victim. >> it's my understanding that you brought some items with you here today? >> yes, i did. >> can i direct your attention to -- would you have your property receipts? how would you best be able to identify your items? with my property receipts i have here. >> okay. yesterday you testified to the jury about specific items that you had collected from the scene. is that right? >> that is correct. >> some of the items included a baseball hat. >> yes, sir. >> some of the items included a stool, a bench, a chair, things like that. >> that is correct. >> also the other items were actually trace analysis swabs that you -- that you did at the scene or different scenes in this case. >> that is correct. >> and you did it from a honda? a honda accord, i guess? >> a silver accord, yes. >> you also did if from the hat? >> yes. >> and you did it from the furniture we just described? >> is correct. >> okay. with you here today you brought that hat is that correct. >> that is correct. >> could you bring that up to the bench there for -- okay. and with the assistance, we may need some items to open this up. you have your gloves with you in your pocket? >> yes. i'm sorry, it's unmarked. let me bring it to the clerk's attention to mark it. >> there is no objection. >> all right. admitted without objection. i will show you what's defense exhibit g. >> here he go, m mr. yen. it is already in evidence. you can proceed and open it. >> judge, permission to publish? >> yes. >> at this point, could you show the jury? and from yesterday, mr. yen, is that the same hat that you documented in the photograph of july 1, 2006, defense exhibit a? >> yes. that's correct. right here. >> thank you, sir. would you mind bringing up your next item that you brought with you? >> the item i was scheduled to bring with me were dna swabs. >> okay. >> and there's multiple swabs from different areas. >> right. in going through my case file, the dna swabs were submitted to the county lab. >> okay. so all you have is your property receipt from those swabs? >> yes, sir. >> let's break it down one last time. can you identify the property receipt you have from the first swab you took? correct me if i'm wrong, i guess there's no way between yesterday and today that you could have gone to the lab and got the swabs back to bring to the jury? >> no, sir. >> you want to go down the list of all the -- what's the easiest way to do it? >> there's swabs from the honda accord. >> yes. >> is that correct? >> yes. >> was a property receipt you prepared for that? >> property receipt number -- if you look at the upper right hand middle, 06009517. >> very good. i have that. and this was the property receipt containing dna swabs from the steering wheel of the honda accord. >> yes, sir. >> from the gear stick of the honda accord. >> that's correct. >> number three from the front seat. >> yes. >> number four would be from the front door interior handle. >> correct. >> number five would be from the passenger side front seat. >> correct. >> number six would be from the driver's side front door. >> that is correct. >> that's 6 of 6. >> 6 of 6, yes, sir this property receipt was created back on july 1, 2006 as you collected this evidence. >> correct. >> actually -- >> july 7th, i'm sorry. >> we bought caught that at same time, because you actually viewed the honda a few days after the incident. >> that's correct. >> so july 7, 2006. >> correct. >> okay. i'd like to actually introduce the property receipt since the swabs are not here. any objection? >> no objection. >> judge, i will use my copy so he doesn't have to dig out -- it will be defense exhibit h. judge, may i publish? >> yes, i can. >> working through a lot of the documents here that will be reviewed. some from the defense side, some from the prosecution side. giving you the sense of investigator yen here, a crime scene investigator, very important. among other things, not only does the defense say somebody else was there with an ak-47 but even the prosecution's primary witness, he will roy larose, the other defendant who pled guilty and agreed to testify also puts a third man with an ak-47 on the scene. now, that witness does not tell you it was the third man who was shooting, he says it was this defendant, damon darling, who was shooting, but the prosecution has to deal with that. this witness on the stand now did that yesterday by testifying about not only the line of sight for eyewitnesss, but the line for the shooting. and making sure that the direction of the shooting came from where this defendant was, also tying in the various spent cartridges that were found on the ground where this defendant had been. obviously a significant witness here for the prosecution. the defense is spending a great deal of time with him. while they are sorting out some documents, we will fit in another break. as we go away, we want to know what you would say if you had the jury box seats and were in the jury for this trial. here's the question today, did the testimony yesterday of the victim's family members, the mother, the sister, help the prosecution? so far 79% of you are voting yes. 21% of you don't think so we'll update those results throughout the course of the day. when i came past the living room, my oldest son said, mom, shea's been shot. and i didn't see anyone until i saw her coming in through the front door. she collapsed on the front. i tried to do cpr. >> and was she responding to you? >> no, she wasn't. >> that's some of the testimony from yesterday, the mother of the victim testifying in the vile of this man, david darling, the defendant, one of the other co-defendants has already pled guilty. he has indicated it was this man who started that shootout in that residential area, that housing project in miami. the defendant watching and listening. investigator arnold yen back on the witness stand of the miami-dade police department. he is continuing his cross examination here. defense attorney jonathan meltz going slowly as they are tracking down those documents here. this witness, as i mentioned before, very, very important because he offers up for these sdwr jurors various locations that the prosecution hopes will show this defendant is the one who started the shooting and the one who had the ak-47 that shot the bullet and went into the neck and killed the victim, 9-year-old sherdavia jenkins. let's go back into the courtroom and see if they're ready to continue cross examination. >> mr. yen, the dna swabs on this exhibit, defense exhibit i, same reasoning you don't have them with you today. >> that's correct. >> because they went to the lab and there's no process for you to get them back from yesterday to today. >> that's correct. >> and that completes the evidence that you brought here with you? >> yes. >> mr. yen, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. >> thank you. >> any redistrict? >> yes, your honor. >> all right so a wrap-up of the cross examination there. again, asking about locations of items, also some of the items shown on the photographs. monica gordo, one of the two prosecutors in this case. she has indicated she has some redirect examination, wants to clear up some things here. she is gathering up some of the photographs they have been using, also the bigger blow-ups of photographs, diagrams and sketches that the prosecution used during the course of their initial questioning of this witness. looks like they're ready to go. let's watch. >> i would seek to introduce state's 3q, 3p, 3n, 3m, 3l. >> no objection. >> okay. i want to talk briefly about the silver honda that you processed. you mentioned, of course, just recently that the processing of the swabs that you took, and yesterday i believe you mentioned that there were also bullet holes in the car. >> that is correct. >> okay. >> did you do anything with reference to those bullet holes? >> this is kathleen hogue, the other prosecutor handling the case. a series of questions to this witness about processing evidence at the scene. >> i will show you now what's state exhibit's 68, 67, 66, 65. do you recognize those photos? >> yes, i do. >> what are they photos of. >> these are the photos of the silver honda accord with the bullet holes and dowell rods inside of them. >> with the court's permission, may the witness step down? >> yes. >> all right. okay? >> yeah. >> all right. looking at state's exhibit 65, the silver honda, do you see any bullet holes in this, or is this just a picture of -- this is just a picture of the vehicle as i see it from one