For one last time, in a sixth floor courtroom at D.C.’s federal courthouse on Wednesday, Assistant U.S. Attorney Ahmed Baset played a video showing the final moments of a police pursuit on October 23, 2020. In the video, taken from the body-worn camera of the police officer in the front passenger seat, an unmarked police car follows behind 20-year-old Karon Hylton-Brown as he rides a rented Revel scooter through an alley in Brightwood Park. With the police car behind him, Hylton-Brown turns onto Kennedy Street and is almost immediately struck by a Toyota Scion. He later died from his injuries.

After playing the video, Baset pointed to Terence Sutton, the D.C. police officer who was driving the car that night.

“What you just saw was that man, [Officer Terence Sutton], chase down Karon Hylton-Brown in cold blood.”

Baset was delivering his closing arguments in the historic trial of two D.C. police officers that lasted eight weeks and included dozens of witnesses — throughout which the jury has seen the video footage surrounding Hylton-Brown’s catastrophic injury from countless angles and perspectives.

Sutton has been charged with second-degree murder. Prosecutors argue that he recklessly and unnecessarily chased Hylton-Brown in clear violation of MPD policy — which prohibits vehicular pursuits except in extreme circumstances — and D.C. municipal regulations — which says police must exercise due regard for the safety of the public when driving. Sutton and his supervisor – Lieutenant Andrew Zabavsky – have also been charged with conspiracy and obstruction of justice for allegedly trying to cover up what happened. The prosecution told the jury that their guilt couldn’t be more clear — but defense attorneys for both men have maintained their total innocence of all charges.

Now, the outcome is up to the jury. They began deliberations in the case on Thursday.

After eight weeks of testimony, it remains unclear exactly what was in Sutton’s mind when he decided to stop Hylton-Brown and pursue him; He and Zabavsky both exercised their right to remain silent and did not testify in the case.

But in closing arguments on Wednesday, Baset said Sutton’s driving behavior was reckless. Baset said Sutton was traveling over 40 miles per hour at some points on residential streets, at times double the speed limit — and described the chase as a “deadly game of chicken.”

And Baset said that in the final third of the alley before the crash, Sutton “inexplicably raise[d] the stakes” and “senselessly accelerate[d]” from 21 miles per hour to 25 miles per hour before Hylton-Brown crashed into the Scion and Sutton stopped the car.

“Sutton’s driving decisions in the final 30 seconds of this chase killed Mr. Hylton-Brown,” said Baset.

Sutton’s defense team, however, has argued that Sutton was acting on “reasonable suspicion” when he followed Hylton-Brown that night. They relied on testimony from other officers who said he had a hunch that Hylton-Brown may have been up to no good that night, and may have returned to the neighborhood to retaliate against someone after an altercation earlier that day.

But Baset emphasized to the jury that there’s been no evidence about what was in Sutton’s mind when he pursued Hylton-Brown that night, and a hunch was just that – a hunch.

“In other words,” Baset said, “he was just guessing. And you can’t kill someone based on a guess.”

On the obstruction charges, Baset argued that Sutton and Zabavsky knew that MPD’s major crash unit and Internal Affairs Division could refer matters surrounding the crash to federal law enforcement for prosecution. He said they conspired together to conceal information in the moments when they turned their body-worn cameras off at the scene and had a private conversation. There’s no footage or audio showing what was said in that conversation, but Baset claimed they were talking to each other to “form a plan” to obstruct investigations into the chase.

Sutton decided to write the official crash report because he knew he had to “control the narrative,” Baset argued. And Baset emphasized the testimony of Captain Franklin Porter, who was the watch commander in charge of the Fourth District on the night of the chase and crash. Porter testified that Zabavsky downplayed his role in the pursuit in conversations with him — even though Zabavsky’s marked SUV started off behind Sutton’s car, then traveled on parallel streets and ended up right by the crash site.

“He minimized. He misled. And that’s obstruction of justice,” said Baset.

The prosecution has argued that Sutton and Zabavsky’s plan to downplay what happened was almost successful, but it fell apart when it became clear that Hylton-Brown’s injuries were fatal — which set off a series of investigations by MPD’s major crash unit (which investigates serious vehicle crashes) and Internal Affairs Division (which investigates police misconduct).

Meanwhile, in their closing arguments, defense attorneys for both men said they felt the government’s case was absurd.

Sutton’s attorney Michael Hannon said his client maintains his innocence on all charges. He described Sutton as a person of integrity — someone who never could have committed murder. And as he emphasized his client’s integrity, Hannon spent much of his closing argument calling Hylton-Brown’s character and decisions into question.

Sutton noted a toxicology report that showed Hylton-Brown had large amounts of THC – the active ingredient in marijuana — in his system that night.

He also emphasized the fact that Hylton-Brown had been previously arrested. He said Hylton-Brown was hanging around Starlight Food, a store at the corner of 5th St. and Kennedy St. NW that Hannon called “the drug store of PSA403.” And he maintained that Sutton and his team were doing their jobs that night, investigating potential crime in a neighborhood plagued with drugs and guns.

“We have to protect the public from people who officers have reasonable suspicion are armed,” said Hannon, though he acknowledged there is no evidence of a gun in the case.

Hannon also said Hylton-Brown could have stopped the pursuit at any time, arguing that “if you do something wrong and police take action against you, you’re responsible.” And he pointed to Hylton-Brown’s driving that night, blaming him for what happened.

“Do you see what he did, exercising his own freedom to behave [how] he wished?” Hannon asked.

On the obstruction and conspiracy charges, Hannon emphasized that MPD investigators were able to do their jobs after the crash.

And Zabavsky’s attorney, Christopher Zampogna, emphasized that “there was no burying facts” in this case. How could his client have buried facts, he argued, when so many of his statements and actions that night were recorded on body camera?

He argued that Zabavsky was unaware of the extent of Hylton-Brown’s injuries at the scene — but that when he learned about his condition from an officer at the hospital with Hylton-Brown, Zabavsky made the necessary notifications to detectives who investigate major vehicle crashes with serious injuries.

In his rebuttal — the final word from any attorney in the trial — Baset encouraged the jury not to speculate, as he said Hannon was encouraging them to do.

“We want you to decide on evidence,” said Baset.

Baset argued that Hylton-Brown could have made mistakes that night, but it doesn’t matter – because it’s Sutton, not Hylton-Brown, who is on trial. And Baset said Sutton’s defense has no answer as to why he was driving so recklessly that night.

He called the defense’s argument that Sutton followed Hylton-Brown because of an altercation he’d had earlier that day “absurd.” He asked why mention of that did not appear in Sutton’s initial police report, which instead described the contact with Hylton-Brown as an attempted traffic stop.

Overall, Baset argued, a “hunch” is not enough for police to pull someone over in the United States — including in neighborhoods like D.C.’s Kennedy Street area. (Hannon repeatedly emphasized Kennedy Street’s high crime rates in his case.) Baset said the freedom to walk away from police when they don’t have enough for a stop applies to everyone, regardless of where they live or who they are.

“Freedom is not just meant for certain people in this city,” said Baset. “You don’t get to just chase people in certain parts of a city on a hunch.”