BOSTON, Oct. 21, 2016—The Dorchester man who intentionally drove his car into and killed 20-year-old James A. Taylor will not receive a new trial, Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel F. Conley said.

In an unpublished decision released today, a Massachusetts Appeals Court panel rejected each argument made in an appeal by ANTWAN WATHEY (D.O.B. 9/24/87).  Wathey was convicted of second-degree murder for the Dorchester crash that claimed Taylor’s life; prosecutors had sought a first-degree conviction but the trial judge declined to instruct jurors that they could infer malice – a key element of murder one – from the use of the car as a weapon.

A Suffolk Superior Court jury in 2014 convicted Wathey of accelerating his 2000 Mazda Millenia and veering into Taylor as he and others crossed Wescott Street in the early morning hours of April 13, 2012, and driving away without slowing or stopping.  The collision occurred moments after Wathey and Taylor were involved in a physical altercation, which came after months of animosity stemming from Wathey’s physical abuse of a former girlfriend who was a relative of Taylor.

Among his claims on appeal, Wathey argued that evidence of his past violent abuse of Taylor’s relative should not have been presented at trial.  The justices disagreed.

“The evidence concerning the defendant’s abuse of [Taylor’s relative] explained the origin of the animosity; therefore, it was probative of the nature of the defendant’s and Taylor’s hostile relationship, and of the defendant’s state of mind on the night of the incident. Moreover, in light of the other evidence the Commonwealth presented to show the defendant purposefully hit Taylor with his car, the judge properly concluded that the probative value of the evidence outweighed any unfair prejudice to the defendant,” the justices wrote.

The justices rejected Wathey’s argument that he should have been allowed to present evidence of Taylor’s previous incarceration and status as a probationer and of prior acts of violence by associates of Taylor who were not present when he was killed, agreeing with a Superior Court judge who called the information “irrelevant.”

Wathey further argued that prosecutors made errors during the course of the trial that impacted the defendant’s right to due process.  The Appeals Court categorically rejected each claim in turn.

Among his arguments, Wathey claimed that prosecutors failed to correct the judge’s apparent misapprehension about what the victim and defendant said to one another on the night of the murder.  However, the justices found that Wathey’s own trial attorney declined to correct the judge’s misunderstanding, while the prosecutor in fact clarified for the judge what had been said by both Wathey and Taylor.

The justices also disputed Wathey’s claim that statements made in closing arguments were inappropriate, instead affirming that a statement was “grounded in the evidence, and was proper.”

“Similar statements that the defendant highlights were likewise proper, and did not shift the evidentiary burden to the defendant….The prosecutor did not misstate facts; his statements that the defendant and Taylor had gotten into multiple fights were supported by the evidence,” the justices wrote.

Assistant District Attorney Masai King prosecuted the case at trial.  Assistant District Attorney Cailin Campbell of the DA’s Appellate Division argued the case on appeal.  Katherine Moran, chief of the DA’s Victim Witness Assistance Program, was the DA’s assigned victim-witness advocate.  Wathey was represented by attorney Patricia DeJuneas.

–30–

All defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.