After two days of deliberations in the case of a man accused of shooting another man outside a Santa Clarita bar, jurors on Thursday failed to reach a consensus on the two most serious charges and found the defendant guilty on three lesser counts of weapons possession.
The trial of Isaac Rashad Clark, which began on July 23, centered on charges of attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon in connection with the October 31, 2022 shooting of Nigel Edwards outside the Black and Blue restaurant.
On Wednesday, jurors asked for more time to discuss Clark’s claims of self-defense, but ultimately the jury was unable to reach a decision.
In response to questions from the jury, defense and prosecution lawyers made their closing arguments for Clark for a second time Thursday afternoon in a San Fernando courtroom.
The prosecution focused on attacking the credibility of the self-defense claim, while the defense attempted to portray shooting victim Edwards as the aggressor in the confrontation.
In order to answer the jury’s questions, both sides were given about half an hour to restate their arguments to the jury in oral arguments.
Both sides played footage from the night of the shooting, taken on cell phones just outside the bar.
On Thursday, Assistant District Attorney Shareen Nizami began to address what she described as demonstrable lies from defense witnesses, including claims that the victim was related to the DJ at the party and that the victim was a member of the Pacoima Piru gang.
Nizami repeatedly told the jury that a reasonable person who feared for his life would not have waited outside the Black and Blue and taunted the victim, only to confront him as he left the bar.
This is the threshold for a claim of self-defense, she said: “What would a reasonable person have done?”
She also said the suspect’s testimony that he fired warning shots while running away from the victim in fear did not seem credible based on footage that showed Clark waiting for the victim outside the bar while repeatedly taunting him. On the witness stand, Clark claimed the victim was bullying him.
Defense attorney Jaaye Person-Lynn began his argument by using a archival photograph of four babies — which was quickly challenged on the grounds of relevance, which the judge allowed — to remind the jury that the defendant was operating under the presumption of innocence in his deliberations. Babies were used as an image of innocence.
Person-Lynn said the victim, who was taller than Clark, attacked him in the parking lot, more than 180 feet from the bar.