A Massachusetts man who was convicted of murder is entitled to a new trial because evidence that the victim drew a gun first was improperly excluded, the state’s highest court ruled.
Renardo Williams was convicted of murdering Bethgy Cator and assaulting Mayklens Francois with intent to kill in a 2018 incident.
Williams was sitting in his car at a convenience store when Cator and Francois pulled up in a car next to them. Cator asked if he could purchase some marijuana from Williams.
Williams entered Cator’s car and instructed his two companions to follow in his own car. However, Cator pulled off the road and Francois pointed a gun at Williams.
Cator said he wasn’t robbing Williams for marijuana but “for everything.” Williams offered his marijuana, watch, and gold chains in exchange for his freedom, but instead Cator drove to Williams’ house to continue the robbery.
When Cator stopped at a laundromat, Williams tried to escape. A gunfight broke out in the car. Francois was wounded, and Cator did not survive.
Francois told police that he had thrown his gun out of the car after calling 911 because “he realized that police would be responding and he didn’t want to get arrested,” according to the police report.
However, the trial judge suppressed this statement, stating that it was not relevant unless Williams could produce more evidence that he knew that Francois had a gun or was the first to draw it.
Williams testified to that effect, and he was convicted. On appeal, he argued that the judge’s decision forced him to testify against himself in violation of the Fifth Amendment.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court agreed in a decision written by Chief Justice Budd.
“Francois’s statements were the only direct evidence in the Commonwealth’s case that bore on the central issue at trial: the defendant’s motivation for shooting the victim,” Chief Justice Budd wrote.
“Although the evidence did not exculpate the defendant, it provided support for an inference that the defendant acted in self-defense,” he added.
