ShareThis Page
Defense to present its case in Ohio police shooting retrial |

Defense to present its case in Ohio police shooting retrial

The Associated Press
| Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:48 a.m
Former University of Cincinnati police officer Raymond Tensing, left, speaks with his lawyer, Stew Mathews, right, during his retrial, Wednesday, June 14, 2017, in the Hamilton County Courthouse in Cincinnati. Tensing is charged with murder and voluntary manslaughter in the shooting of unarmed black motorist Sam DuBose during a July 19, 2015, traffic stop.

CINCINNATI — The defense is set to present its case in the Ohio murder retrial of a former University of Cincinnati police officer.

Attorneys for Ray Tensing will start calling witnesses Thursday, with Tensing himself expected to take the stand as early as Friday.

The state rested its case Wednesday after Dr. Karen Looman of the Hamilton County coroner’s office testified that Sam DuBose died instantly from a bullet fired into his head at a downward angle. Tensing looked away as graphic autopsy photos were shown in court.

Tensing, who is white, is charged in the 2015 traffic-stop shooting of the unarmed black motorist.

Tensing he has said he feared for his life as DuBose tried to drive away.

His first trial ended in a hung jury in November.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.