On Oct. 17, an Arizona man appeared in court regarding a shooting that happened Oct, 2, 2022, where an expert witness’s credibility was challenged by the state at the Maricopa County Superior Court.
The case, State of Arizona v. Joseph Ortiz, accused Ortiz of shooting an unnamed victim after the victim pushed his girlfriend Mary Chen and pushed the victim to the ground. Ortiz’s grandmother also testified [that] the Victim elbowed her, and she fell to her knees but “did not sustain injury,” according to the state’s document filed in the court, which consists of 47 pages.
The document was credited to Attorney General Kristin K. Mayes and Assistant Attorneys General Haleigh Farrelly and Catherine Ferguson-Gilbert.
Ortiz pleaded for self defense, as well as the defense of others.
The state’s legal argument was to have Chen testify before the jury, on the record. The document also says that Chen claimed that the case was self defense as she felt “badly for Ortiz.”
“He was suicidal that night or telling me he was, anyway,” Chen said. “That was the only reason I drove out to meet him.”
Chen went on to say that Ortiz was heavily drinking alcohol and using illegal substances at that moment in time.
The court brought expert witness Erik Brown to the witness stand around 10:30 a.m., when the trial officially started for that specific day. The plaintiff questioned Brown first.
Brown specializes as a firearms examiner with experience in incident reconstruction. The plaintiff, who did not introduce herself, questioned Brown’s experience with the specifics of the case, and had a goal to prove that his expertise regarding the case were not relevant.
“We did competency tests for comparison analysis,” Brown said. “… I wasn’t proficiency tested, I was trained [in the field of firearms].”
When examining a projectile in a homicide case, Brown looked at materials embedded to collect traces, sometimes analyzing to determine what the path of the projectile was based on, photos and videos from law enforcement.
In their cross-examination, the defense argued that Brown Reviewed police reports, saw scene photos, medical records based on doctors’ opinions and body cam footage from the police.
In the same documents as previously mentioned, Chen said that the victim was the aggressor, but ultimately Ortiz was the one that drew the firearm, leading to the shooting.
“… I ran after the gunshot and I saw Justin had been shot,” Chen said. “I ran over there and suctioned the wound right away. So I wasn’t, I don’t know who was around at that point ‘cause my focus was getting the bleeding under control.”
After Brown exited the witness stand after nearly half an hour of testifying, judge Sam J. Myers took time to review the information presented to him about Brown.
“The court finds that the witness does meet the qualifications,” Myers said. “…set by rule 702 of the rules of evidence.”
This case is ongoing, so a verdict has not been reached yet.
Edited by Shi Bradley
