Crash report questioned

Defense works on reconstruction of fatal wreck

The attorney for a man accused of killing seven people in a May 30 head-on collision raised questions Tuesday about a state trooper’s investigation of the accident scene.

After hearing testimony Tuesday from a state trooper and reviewing the accident report, defense attorney Tommy Damico, representing Brett G. Gerald, said he still has questions about whether the collision occurred in Gerald’s lane of travel or in that of the victims’ car.

Damico also said he wants his experts to review whatever a state trooper downloaded from an onboard computer, or “black box,” in Gerald’s truck.

“I don’t know if the information obtained by State Police is going to be enough to tell me where the accident took place,” Damico said after court.

Five people in the car died instantly in the collision on La. 67 about a mile south of the Comite River in East Feliciana Parish: the driver, Brenda Gaines, 64; Denise Gaines, 33; Diamond Johnson, 12; Jyran Johnson, 6; and Angela Mosely, 36, all of Baton Rouge.

Two other passengers, Willie Gaines Jr., 15, and Rogerick Johnson Jr., 13, also of Baton Rouge, died later.

Gerald, 30, of Greensburg, faces seven counts of vehicular homicide in the case. State Police said an analysis of a sample of Gerald’s blood taken at Lane Regional Medical Center in Zachary showed his blood-alcohol content was 0.15 percent.

In Louisiana, a blood-alcohol content of 0.08 percent is considered presumptive evidence of drunken driving.

Relatives of the victims, backed by a New Orleans minister active in civil-rights causes and other supporters, picketed outside the courthouse, holding signs critical of Gerald’s treatment by the criminal justice system after three earlier DWI arrests.

Some of them wore T-shirts into the small, first-floor courtroom demanding “no more favoritism” and “justice for the Gaines, Matthews and Johnson families.”

John Gaines Jr., whose mother and five other relatives died in the crash, said Gerald was out celebrating his birthday on May 30.

“Well, today is my birthday, and I am demonstrating for the justice of my loved ones, along with my family and friends,” he said, adding that Tuesday’s demonstration was intended to let the community know “this could have been anyone’s family that this happened to.”

The Rev. Raymond Brown, of New Orleans, said the seven deaths “shocked the state and the nation.”

“Is it (about) civil rights? I don’t know. But I know this: It’s a failed system. His (Gerald’s) political favoritism has, hopefully, come to an end,” Brown said.

Gerald, who has been in jail since June 4 with bail set at $1 million, is the grandson of Gaston Gerald, a former state senator and Baton Rouge city-parish councilman.

“I don’t know why they’re trying to make it a political case. It’s not,” Damico said.

The Tuesday court session included reports from Damico and 20th Judicial District Attorney Sam D’Aquilla on the status of pretrial discovery motions, which Judge William G. Carmichael held open without a final decision until Oct. 9. Trial is set in December.

The hearing was held in a small downtown courtroom because Gerald’s ankle injuries require him to attend in a wheelchair and the antebellum courthouse does not have an elevator.

Senior Trooper Jeff Holley answered questions about his interrogation of Gerald at the hospital emergency room, serving a search warrant to obtain the vehicle computer and the accident scene.

Holley said he found Gerald to be impaired at the hospital but believed he understood his right against self-incrimination.

State Police spokesmen said after the crash that Gerald’s truck crossed the centerline of the highway into the path of Gaines’ vehicle.

The trooper said he based the conclusions in his report on statements from eyewitnesses, evidence at the scene and Gerald’s statement, which Holley said was that he had no recollection of the crash.

He said someone running into a tree would likely remember it after the impact.

“If you don’t know what happened, that tells me something,” Holley said.

Damico questioned whether the collision could have occurred in Gerald’s northbound lane, rather than the southbound lane as stated in the report.

After court, the attorney said defense experts are working on their own reconstruction of the collision, as well as an analysis of the State Police Crime Lab’s tests of Gerald’s blood.

Responding to a reporter’s questions, D’Aquilla and Damico said demonstrations in the community during court hearings, and the resulting publicity, increase the chances of the trial being moved.

“That’s certainly a possibility. This doesn’t help,” Damico said, adding that wearing similar T-shirts and waving signs on a trial day would be grounds for a mistrial.

“The more publicity, the more it increases chances that the trial could be moved. But it doesn’t matter where it’s tried, you’d still have the same overwhelming evidence,” D’Aquilla said.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (14)


1) Comment by NewsReader - 13/09/2012

I disagree with the conclusion that if it was in his lane he's not to blame. Were there any eyewitnesses? Can anyone really be sure that Brett Gerald wasn't swerving all over the road, that the car tried to avoid him by going into HIS lane, he woke up/realized where he was, went back into his lane at the last minute and had the collision? Anyone who has ever encountered a drunk driver on the roads knows they are not exactly predictable.

2) Comment by Attila - 12/09/2012

IF this low life was at fault he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law...if found guilty he should be put away for life with no parole...IF the accident happened in his lane, the fact that he was drunk should have no bearing on who caused the accident. I do not know if the fact that he was drunk can be held against him if the other party was in his lane...perhaps he could have avoided the wreck if he were sober...that is a question that the law will have to address...the law is the law. Both sides have to accept that.

3) Comment by CountryAttorney - 12/09/2012

Thanks guys. DMJ, I think per our discussion a few weeks ago, I still own you one aluminum foil covered hat.

4) Comment by BRmoderate - 12/09/2012

Thank you Country Attorney for clarifying why the defense is trying to establish which lane he was in

5) Comment by DMJ - 12/09/2012

Good point, CountryAttorney. People seem to forget that our legal system is not designed to punish the guilty; it's designed to protect the innocent. Ideally, we get both, but the burden of proof is on the state, not the defendant.

6) Comment by CountryAttorney - 12/09/2012

I'm definitely not taking the side of the defendant on this one, but if the accident occurred in his own lane of travel, then he did not "cause" the accident and cannot be convicted of vehicular homicide. Additionally, we all have a right to plead not guilty and force the state to prove its case, you can't blame the man for exercising his rights. You're all doing the same thing by posting on this wall. If he's guilty, lock him up and throw away the key, but until the state proves its case, he has as much right as you and me to take this course of action.

7) Comment by DMJ - 12/09/2012

How 'bout what? Did I miss something? When did this become about me?

8) Comment by foldgers - 12/09/2012

I am NOT for the driver at all! He should be in jail for the rest of his life, minimum! But, I just hope that people, of whatever race, do NOT harass, threaten or actually hurt the lawyer representing him. It always upsets me when people start to hate the lawyer defending people like this. It is their job and the man has a RIGHT to due process. No matter what the lawyer says, he is just doing his job. As to the report and which lane the cars were in, well, I am sure he is using that to just try and get this guy something less than life in prison. So, please, no anger or ill will to the lawyer. I am sure most of us here do not like lawyers, but we do need them. And to Country Boy....to the second half of your comment, I was thinking the exact same thing.

9) Comment by Pakistani - 12/09/2012

PUT HIM IN PRISON FOR LIFE. THE ***** SHOULD JUST PLEAD GUILTY AND SPARE THIS FAMILY ANY FURTHER PAIN. THIS GUY IS AS BAD AS THE HOODLUMS PULLING THE TRIGGER ON GUNS IN OUR CITY. PLEAD GUILTY DUMB BOY.

10) Comment by JenniferW1126 - 12/09/2012

This was not an accident! It was beyond "poor judgement'! The article says he had 3 previous arrests for DUI. He is a ***** who made the CHOICE to drive drunk AGAIN knowing that he could kill people on the road! I doubt he is living with anything on his conscience, because if he had one he would have stopped driving drunk after the first wake-up call. Or maybe the second. Or maybe the third. But he didn't. He is just a selfish punk who had no concern for anyone. It's a shame INNOCENT people were killed instead of the trash who caused this. Hope he rots in prison forever for the MURDERS he committed.

11) Comment by CountryBoysCanSurvive - 12/09/2012

I hope Mr. Gerald is convicted and sent away for a long long time....How bot' that dmj and all you other race baiters.

12) Comment by ABayouBoy - 12/09/2012

The protesters are out in force. But, please remember, this was an accident. The result of very poor judgement on Gerald's part, yes. He will have to live with the knowledge that due to his negligence, 7 people died. Regardless of what sentence is imposed in court, this man will have to live with their deaths on his conscience for the rest of his life. My condolences to the victims families. I hope that they find peace and closure following the proceedings.

13) Comment by Bouncer - 11/09/2012

I have to side with the protesters on this one. It doesn't matter what lane the accident occurred in. The guy was almost 2x over the legal limit for drunkenness, and he had a proven record of habitual offense. He shouldn't see the light of freedom again for a long, long time. Leave it to a scummy attorney to muddy the waters of justice, rather than clear them up.

14) Comment by foldgers - 11/09/2012

Man... if this guy gets out of this??? I may have to leave town for a while.