Despite eyewitness account, jury comes back hung in a deadly Lexington shooting case
A man accused of shooting and killing a Lexington teenager was supposed to find out whether or not a jury found him guilty Thursday, but the jury instead came back hung after days of testimony and more than six hours of deliberation, prosecutors confirmed.
Kaleb Henry, 21, is facing charges of complicity to murder, robbery and wanton endangerment for his alleged role in the killing of 19-year-old Miguel Diaz on July 27, 2020.
Days of trial and testimony weren’t enough to persuade the 12-person jury to unanimously agree on a verdict. Some key witnesses in the trial included a co-defendant who pleaded guilty and then testified against Henry, a couple of witnesses and multiple forensic experts and detectives.
The co-defendant, Isaac Suastegui, pleaded guilty to second-degree manslaughter. He told the jury during the trial that he watched Henry shoot and kill Diaz. Despite Suastegui’s testimony, jurors couldn’t reach a verdict after the defense questioned the validity of Suastegui’s statements.
Defense: Prosecutors decided to ‘cherry pick’ witnesses
During closing arguments Thursday, defense attorney Daniel Whitley accused the prosecution of selectively picking its witnesses. He said prosecutors had leverage over the witnesses because of the witnesses’ criminal history and plea deals.
Whitley specifically referenced Suastegui, the co-defendant who testified against Henry after pleading guilty, as an example. Whitley said Suastegui didn’t identify Henry as the shooter when police first questioned Suastegui shortly after the shooting.
Whitley also questioned why the prosecution didn’t call Suastegui’s brother, Henry’s girlfriend or any of the neighbors or residents on Speigle Street to the stand for testimony, saying they could have refuted claims made by witnesses or proven claims made by Henry.
Whitley said the only witnesses prosecutors brought were “all facing a bunch of time” and now they’ve all “pointed at Kaleb saying he’s guilty.” Whitley said the prosecutors could “control” those witnesses.
“What about the witnesses they cannot control? What about the witnesses that didn’t have charges? What about the witnesses that had no power to flex on them? What did they do? They didn’t call any of them,” Whitley said. “That’s dangerous. That’s a tell-tale sign, not only that you’re not proving a case, but he’s innocent.”
Evidence shows that Suastegui sent his brother a photo of Diaz’ body over Snapchat after the shooting, according to a detective who testified during the trial. That photo was never recovered and Suastegui’s brother never testified.
During the investigation, Henry told detectives he was with his girlfriend and not at the home on Speigle Street at the time of the shooting. Whitley said it would have been easy for the prosecution to refute that claim by simply calling his girlfriend to the stand.
“What they have is a win at all cost mentality, and they will cherry pick certain evidence to make a person who’s innocent look guilty, but they will not present you all the evidence,” Whitley said.
Prosecutors: Witnesses were brave to speak honestly in front of suspect
The prosecution responded to Whitley’s accusations of cherry picking during closing arguments Thursday. The prosecutors said they worked with the witnesses they had available.
“Our cases aren’t like on TV, you all are probably thinking around hour three of the (forensic services) people coming in showing photo after photo,” the prosecutor said. “We’re sorry about that, but it’s just part of the trial process.”
Specifically relating to Suastegui, the prosecution said it’s not outlandish for someone to lie during their initial interviews with police, especially when friends are involved in the accusations.
“Is it crazy to think that maybe he was scared? Maybe he was scared to snitch out his friend?” a prosecutor asked jurors.
Prosecutors said other witnesses revealed intimate details of their lives, which is a sign they were being honest.
The witnesses were “being honest with you all, and it’s an even bigger deal to look at someone in the eye, point them out and say ‘yes, that person shot at me, shot my friend,’ to do that in front of people under oath,” a prosecutor told jurors. “... They’re not perfect, but they sat here and talked to you all.”
Prosecutors also said none of the shell casings or projectiles on scene were connected to Suastegui’s gun, so the evidence didn’t support Suastegui being responsible for the shooting.
Because the jury couldn’t reach a decision, Henry could be re-tried. He will be back in court on April 8 for a status hearing.
This story was originally published March 25, 2022 at 3:42 PM.
