LEXINGTON, Ky. — The high-stakes murder trial of Corry Jackson took a dramatic turn this week. The Herald-Leader’s Taylor Six reports defense attorney Daniel Whitley announced in opening statements that another man, Courtney Wrenn, would testify to firing the fatal shots in the April 2023 shooting that left two people dead on Chestnut Street. Jackson, 38, faces charges of murder and being a felon in possession of a handgun. Complicated Chain of Events The prosecution asserts that Timonte Harris, 43, killed Lakeisha Hill, 32, before being fatally shot himself. Jackson stands accused only of Harris’s murder. According to court filings, Jackson was arrested near the scene after being identified by witnesses and captured on surveillance footage. However, Whitley’s bold legal strategy rests on testimony from Wrenn, whose DNA was found on the Blackout rifle used in the shooting. Whitley contends that Wrenn, not Jackson, fired the shots that killed Harris. A Legal Web of Defenses Legal experts following the case have noted that if Wrenn killed Harris to prevent further violence, he might be eligible for a “defense of others” legal argument, similar to self-defense. Notably, Jackson’s defense is not pursuing that theory; instead, they assert he was not the shooter at all. Wrenn’s willingness to testify is seen as a high-risk maneuver, especially given that he is already facing unrelated charges for murder and burglary in a separate incident. His testimony could either clear Jackson or complicate Wrenn’s own legal challenges. Civil Litigation and Malicious Prosecution Claims The case has parallels to a separate federal lawsuit filed by Whitley on behalf of Kenneth Wadkins, a Lexington man arrested and jailed for over two months on murder charges before a grand jury declined to indict him. Court records show that Wadkins alleges Detective Kristyn Klingshirn pursued charges despite having unreliable evidence, including dubious witness statements and potentially exculpatory evidence that was withheld. In the malicious prosecution lawsuit, Wadkins claims that Klingshirn relied heavily on a “cooperating witness,” later revealed as Buford Lee Lyvers Jr., a known felon allegedly seeking favorable treatment in exchange for his testimony. Wadkins further asserts that multiple anonymous Crime Stoppers tips pointing to him were unverified and that location data placing his phone near the crime scene was inconclusive due to multiple devices pinging the same tower. Legal Disputes and Procedural Challenges Klingshirn’s legal defense argued that findings of probable cause by two different judges should be enough to dismiss the case. However, a federal judge ruled otherwise, allowing the lawsuit to proceed due to concerns about flawed investigative practices. The court cited procedural failures, including inconsistencies in Klingshirn’s affidavits and her alleged omission of critical facts from her sworn statements. During a preliminary hearing in Wadkins’ criminal case, prosecutors presented limited forensic evidence and relied on questionable eyewitness testimony. Despite this, a judge found probable cause, though the grand jury ultimately refused to indict. A Troubling Pattern? The parallels between Wadkins’ and Jackson’s cases have intensified public scrutiny of Lexington’s criminal justice system. In both instances, defense attorneys highlighted questionable investigative methods, including reliance on tenuous witness statements and a failure to pursue alternative suspects aggressively. Jackson, who has spent 18 months in jail on a $100,000 bond his family could not afford, faces severe personal and financial hardship. His prolonged detention has left his wife and young daughter struggling without his financial support, underscoring the real-life toll of extended pretrial incarceration. The post Does Corry Jackson’s Lexington murder trial reveal a pattern of malicious prosecution? appeared first on The Lexington Times.