By Amarys Rodriguez
On February 2nd, 2024, the case of the State of Texas vs. Alex Greene was brought to trial. The prosecution, consisting of attorneys from District 5, Alli Mitchell and Jake Kleinjan brought forth evidence that the defendant, Officer Alex Greene, should be found guilty of felony murder in the first and second degree. To prove their case they called forth three witnesses, Sage Alexander, the nephew of the victim Kamari Jenkins, Leighton Shields, a fellow police officer of Alex Greene, and Breslin Barajas, a forensic pathologist that examined the body of Kamari Jenkins. Through each witness they built their case brick by brick, that the “reckless actions” of Alex Greene should be the reason for his conviction, because as attorney Alli Mitchell emphasized in her opening statement, “Kamari Jenkins was simply trying to protect her castle”.
In contrast, the defense attorneys, Keri Collins and Adelaide Cowden from District 2, argued that Officer Greene had to make a “split-second decision, in a life or death situation”. Through the testimony of their three witnesses Ferrin Glass, Officer Alex Greene, and Bellamy Fraye, they emphasized that Officer Greene acted in accordance with his department policies in taking the shot against Kamari Jenkins that resulted in her death.
As each side defended their case, in an effort to prove or disprove the burden of the prosecution, in the end with the two bangs of a gavel, the “Prosecution has not met their burden on count one, felony murder, but has met their burden on count two, they will be charged for count 2, felony murder.” This was ultimately a trial of responsibility, in a case like this how does one hold an officer accountable for defending his life, yet ending the life of another?