Dayton man guilty of murder

“The state’s case was that (Martin) shot (Tisdale) out of anger, not in self defense,” Montgomery County assistant prosecutor Lynda Dodd said. “The jury agreed with that and they found him guilty of that plus other charges involving weapons from shooting from his vehicle.

“We’re very pleased with the verdict. It was a shooting the Sunday before Easter. It’s been very hard on the family to lose a son. We’re hoping this will bring them some sense of justice and some sense of closure.”

Martin, 58, was accused of shooting Tisdale, 38, on March 26 near James H. McGee and West Third Street. Police said Martin shot Tisdale during an argument while Martin was in his car.

Martin was indicted on two counts of murder, four counts of felonious assault and one count of having weapons under disability, discharge of a firearm on or near prohibited premises and improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle.

The jury found Martin guilty on all counts except two of the felonious assault charges related to a shot fired after the fatal one that hit the windshield of Martin’s car.

Martin claimed the Castle Doctrine, which defines when someone can use lethal force to protect themselves in their home or property — including their vehicle. In Ohio, the law was approved in 2008 and updated in 2011.

“I shot one time,” Martin said when he testified on Monday. “He had a firearm in his hand and I didn’t want to die that night, or any night.”

Also Monday, Dodd read Martin’s own words from a May 25 recorded conversation Martin had with a friend: “What he thought he had was Little Bo Peep in the car and Little Bo Peep wasn’t in the car, King Kong was. Bottom line.”

Defense attorney Jimmie Christon had argued that Martin saw Tisdale with a gun.

“The defendant saw Mr. Tisdale … with a gun as he walked around the car, (the defendant) saw in his rear-view mirror, (Tisdale) walked around the defendant’s car, came to the door without privilege to do so,” Christon said.

No weapon other than Tisdale’s was found.

“The defendant was saying the victim had a gun,” Dodd said. “If the victim had had a gun and pulled it on him, that would have been a different case.”