Antoinette Davis Stands Trial for the Murder of Shaniya Davis October 14

No, this case has not fallen off the edge because of other incidents and verdicts.  From the Fayetteville Observer:

The trial for the mother of 5-year-old Shaniya Davis is scheduled for Oct. 14 in Cumberland County Superior Court.

Antoinette Davis, 29, is accused of giving her child to Mario Andrette McNeill on Nov. 10, 2009, to settle a drug debt. McNeill was convicted of the girl’s murder in May and sentenced to death.

Six days after Shaniya disappeared, her body was found in woods in a rural area of Lee County off N.C. 87.

Davis is accused of first-degree murder, first-degree rape, first-degree sex offense, child abuse, sexual servitude with a child, child abuse sexual act, human trafficking and indecent liberties with a child.

During an administrative meeting Friday, Cumberland County District Attorney Billy West told Senior Resident Superior Court Judge Jim Ammons that he anticipates that the trial will last four to six weeks.

Davis, who is being held in the Cumberland County Detention Center, did not make an appearance.

Her lawyer, D.W. Bray, asked Ammons for a second lawyer to assist him in her defense. The reason, he said, is the large amount of paperwork involved and “the extraordinary nature of this case.”

Ammons approved Bray’s request.

I have no doubt that the verdict will be life without possibility of parole for Antoinette Davis.  However, the question of who really passed off the little girl to her murderer has got to be cleared up.

I said this a few weeks ago regarding Brenda Davis’ possible complicity in the murder of her niece.  Brenda Davis became involved with the brother of Mario McNeill’s last girlfriend, April Autry, after Davis’ relationship with McNeill ended:

The authorities need to get to the bottom of this one piece of the puzzle.  It won’t help McNeill—thank goodness!—but it will certainly help to clarify matters as to who actually did what.  If Antoinette was trying to protect or cover up for her sister, especially on that 911 tape above, she may be convicted on a lesser charge.   However, if Brenda is the one who actually gave Shaniya to her murderer, without any culpable prompting from Antoinette, then it is Brenda who will do some extremely serious jail time for what occurred.

Who knows why Brenda Davis would want to sell her niece to O’Neill.  She had more to gain rather than Antoinette, who was dependent on her for shelter.  Did Brenda want to get back with him?  Did she want drugs out of the transaction?  There might be one less mouth to feed.  Remember, it was Brenda who had had the relationship with McNeill, and not Antoinette.

I repeat: Bradley Lockhart’s ass needs to be hauled in and tried as well on charges of abandonment, for passing off custody of the child who had previously been taken away from its mother stemming from claims of abuse without the knowledge, investigation or consent of the child welfare authorities.  But no.  Only the black participants of this sad incident will be charged, tried and jailed.  Why Bradley Lockhart?  Because there is proof that Shaniya was a burden to him and to his future plans; that his girlfriends and sister Carey actually cared for, fed and clothed her, and that he was preparing to permanently leave the state with another woman who had refused to help raise the girl.  He was going to dump Shaniya no matter what the circumstances were for another life.

To pass off responsibility to just the black people involved in the Shaniya Davis case is racism.  The other, untried instigator of this whole sad story is Bradley Lockhart, who really didn’t give a damn, and who was lawyering up when this story first began because the very jail bars were casting a shadow on him.  Those tears he shed for Shaniya might well have been tears for his own sorry ass if the authorities had done their jobs instead aiding in the cover-up of the state and county Department of Social Services’ responsibility regarding Shaniya’s case.  If these files—evidence—had not been deep-sixed and sanitized, I think that the public would have seen a lot clearer picture of what may have happened.  And don’t say that there wasn’t a cover-up; there was.

I still question why was Bradley Lockhart protected from prosecution?  I still question why DSS was allowed to protect itself from prosecution for wrongdoing and to destroy evidence pertaining to this case.  Who benefited from the cover-up other than the social workers and the management?

It will be interesting to see whether the defense will call Lockhart to the witness stand, because he has some explaining to do, in my humble opinion.

Stay tuned.

Related articles

• Trial Scheduled For Mother Of Slain NC Girl (witn.com)
• Cumberland County man first person charged under Shaniya’s Law (charlotte.news14.com)
• NC businessman accused of arranging sex with child (sfgate.com)

~ by blksista on August 3, 2013.