Whereabouts of accused in 2021 murder case debated in closing arguments

By Sophia Strocko, Alexander Taylor – July 5, 2024
Court | Daily Stories | Suspects |

“We know exactly what happened that night. He was the driver. He was an accomplice,” the prosecutor told the jury as the defense delivered closing arguments in the murder trial on July 3.

Kevin Dudley, 41, is charged with two counts of first-degree murder, one count of using a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence and unlawful possession of a regulated firearm in connection with the June 3, 2021, murder of 18-year-old Kozee Spriggs.

Before Baltimore County District Court Judge Yolanda A. Tanner, the prosecutor led the jury through a detailed timeline and video footage of the night of Spriggs’ murder. According to the prosecution’s narrative, Dudley, although not Spriggs’ shooter himself, was guilty of first-degree murder as an accomplice.

The prosecutor said Dudley was the renter and driver of a red Chrysler that was allegedly captured on video in an alley adjacent to where Spriggs’ decomposing body was later found in the backyard of a home in the 1300 block of Ensor Street. Two unidentified men were seen removing the body from the trunk of the vehicle and disappearing into the woods. When the two men returned to the car, it fled the scene.

“We’re not saying Kevin Dudley pulled the trigger that night. But we are saying he was an accessory,” the prosecutor told the jury. “Driving the girl who’s in your trunk to a deserted place at 2 a.m. — that’s conspiracy.”

The prosecution also reminded jurors that, regardless of the first-degree murder charge, Dudley allegedly broke the law by carrying a firearm in his vehicle on the night of the murder because he had a prior firearm possession conviction that barred him from possessing one.

In her closing argument, Dudley’s defense attorney, Anne-Marie Gering, argued that Dudley could not have been at the scene of the crime because his cellphone was recorded ringing across town at the same time as Spriggs’ murder.

She also mentioned that the video footage did not show anyone in the trunk of the car — the place where Dudley and Spriggs’ shooter allegedly placed Spriggs — and that Spriggs’ DNA, which was found in the trunk, could be from her placing something of her own there.

Gering further argued that Dudley had no motive to kill Spriggs.

“Justice may be about convicting someone of a crime, but I think it’s primarily about preventing someone from being convicted of a crime they didn’t commit,” Gering said.

During the rebuttal, the prosecution argued that the absence of the telephone at the crime scene only proved that it was not the telephone, and not the accused, that was at the crime scene.

Follow this case