A tearful Gregory Avery thanked jurors as they left a Washington County courtroom moments after acquitting him of killing two men, his attorney said.
“Everything pointed away from Greg Avery,” attorney Michael Deriso said. “I'm happy for my client, and I'm happy for his family.”
Avery, 25, of Washington was the second man arrested in the February 2009 killings of Marquis Taylor, 24, of Washington and Troy Saunders, 23, of Canton outside the former Cabaret West Bar in Washington.
Phillip Whitlock Jr. pleaded guilty to the homicides in April 2012 and then told investigators Avery was the shooter. Whitlock, 29, of Washington testified during Avery's trial and awaits sentencing.
First Assistant District Attorney Michael Lucas said he knew Avery's case would be difficult to prosecute.
“We knew that one of the challenges would be that we had witnesses that said nothing initially or were saying more than they had initially,” Lucas said. “The primary bone of contention was the credibility of those witness who would point to Greg Avery as the shooter.”
Deriso said the credibility of Whitlock and other witnesses “was huge” in the case — video evidence presented at the trial did not match their testimony.
Avery was returned to the Washington County Jail after the jury's verdict. He remains there on charges he shot Whitlock's brother six months after the Cabaret West Bar killings. Deriso intends to ask the judge in that case to lower his client's bond based on the outcome of the homicide trial.
Lucas does not expect Friday's verdict to affect his prosecution of the other case.
Aaron Aupperlee is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.