Warren bar slaying trial continues
Jury to resume deliberations
WARREN — The jury in a Trumbull County aggravated murder trial will resume deliberations this morning after failing to reach a verdict late into Thursday afternoon.
Closing arguments in the trial of Zaa Von Hameed, who is accused in a deadly altercation that occurred May 13 at Park Place Tavern, took place Wednesday afternoon.
The jury began deliberations at 11:30 a.m. Thursday in Trumbull County Common Pleas Court. The case is being heard before Judge Andrew D. Logan.
Hameed, 26, faces an aggravated murder charge, which contains a firearm specification, in connection to the death of Nathanial Bradley, 20.
Prosecutors argued the shooting was intentional, while defense attorneys claimed it was an act of self-defense. Deliberations are scheduled to resume at 10 a.m. today and are expected to continue until a verdict is reached.
In his closing statements, Trumbull County Assistant Prosecutor Michael Burnett reviewed testimony from law enforcement and witnesses. Police officers testified about arriving at a chaotic crime scene where the victim had sustained fatal gunshot wounds.
Burnett also referred to the bar manager’s testimony, describing an altercation between Hameed and others that ended with gunfire. He presented forensic findings indicating that the victim was shot while lying prone, which, according to Burnett, showed intent and calculation.
Burnett said the defendant’s attempt to leave the area afterward could be interpreted as awareness of guilt. He is prosecuting the case alongside Assistant Prosecutor Kevin Trapp.
Defense attorney Aaron M. Meikle argued that the defendant acted in self-defense, stating that the defendant felt threatened after being physically attacked. Meikle questioned the thoroughness of the investigation, noting that DNA testing on a weapon the bar manager said belonged to him was not conducted.
The defense lawyer suggested that a more comprehensive search for other weapons at the scene may have provided additional context.
Meikle argued that state had not proven intent or prior calculation, which are necessary for an aggravated murder conviction.