The judge determined Tuesday morning that rapper YNW Melly’s double murder trial will continue. That was in doubt until Broward Circuit Judge John Murphy refused defense counsel David Howard’s mistrial motion.
Howard contended last week that the jury had become tainted as a result of the state’s questioning of Felicia Holmes, Melly’s ex-girlfriend’s mother. Howard requested that the judge strike evidence that could not be verified, but Murphy instructed him to file a written motion instead.
Also Read| YNW Melly: Net worth, age, relationship, family, career and more
After spending the night of October 26, 2018, at a Fort Lauderdale recording studio, Melly, real name Jamell Demons, is charged with shooting dead his childhood friends Anthony Williams and Christopher Thomas Jr. in an alleged drive-by cover-up.
Cortlen Henry, also known as YNW Bortlen, a confidant, was detained and charged with the killings. Williams and Thomas, who belonged to the YNW group and were also budding rappers, went by the names YNW Sakchaser and YNW Juvy, respectively.
After Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a statute lowering the requirement for a death sentence to an 8-4 vote, the 24-year-old’s case is among the first being taken into consideration. It does not necessarily follow that a defendant is found innocent if the judge declared a mistrial.
Mistrials typically happen when a jury cannot decide on a case or when there has been misbehavior or a severe mistake that could have resulted in an unfair trial. In most circumstances, prosecutors may request a second trial within 90 days of the initial trial if a judge declares a mistrial.
Also Read| Who is Nicole Burdett? All about YNW Melly’s defense lawyers for double murder trial
The testimony of Holmes was a major point of contention between the prosecution and the defense. After Howard objected to her testifying, there were multiple breaks and a back-and-forth with the prosecution. Holmes was requested to testify over her 2018 statement to the police by the prosecutor, Kristine Bradley. Howard claimed that Holmes’ remark was inadmissible proof.
