The State of Ohio V. Antoine Tolbert: Criminalizing Black Leaders - Trial Week 2

CLEVELAND — The second week of trial in The State of Ohio v. Antoine Tolbert saw the defense aggressively push back against the prosecution’s narrative, casting serious doubt on the credibility of key witnesses, exposing potential police negligence1, and reinforcing their portrayal of the defendants — Antoine Tolbert, also known as “Chairman Faheim,” Rameer Askew, and Austreeia Everson — as community leaders targeted for their activism with New Era Cleveland.

From Monday through Friday, proceedings inside the Cuyahoga County Justice Center shifted in tone, with repeated cracks appearing in the state’s case.

DAY 5: Gas Station Co-Owner Caught Lying, State Faces Heat

Monday’s proceedings opened with a legal debate over whether Cleveland City Council President Blaine Griffin2 would be compelled to testify. While the judge ultimately postponed the decision, the defense was granted leeway to refer to Griffin’s public comments and written praise of New Era Cleveland — particularly statements affirming the community impact of Chairman Faheim and the group’s work against human trafficking.

The most consequential development came during the testimony of Dahoud Hamidah, a co-owner of the Race Fuel gas station where the August 2024 incident occurred. Hamidah was exposed on the stand for lying, failing to identify himself in surveillance footage, and was later caught speaking about the case with a detective — a violation of the court’s witness orders. Defense attorneys highlighted these moments as clear indications of compromised credibility. Hamidah’s contradictions and improper conduct set the tone for a week in which the defense would continue to hammer away at the reliability of the state’s witnesses.

DAY 6: Teen Witness Endorses Defendants, Officer Disciplinary Records Suppressed

On Tuesday, Judge Vodrey ruled against the defense’s motion to access internal disciplinary records of two Cleveland police officers — a setback, but not one that derailed the defense’s momentum.

The state’s first witness of the day, 14-year-old Jamir Hale, offered an unexpected boost to the defense. Hale described working alongside Tolbert and Askew and testified that he believed in their mission, praising their efforts to uplift young people and intervene in community violence. His testimony reinforced the defendants’ image not as threats, but as grassroots organizers committed to change.

Later that day, CPD Officers Bryce Carmichael and John McCarthy took the stand. Their testimony centered on procedural details and did little to advance the prosecution’s case. Meanwhile, courtroom concerns escalated as the court learned Hamidah did discuss the case with law enforcement. A prosecution law clerk confirmed overhearing the term “cross-examination” during his improper recess conversation with a detective — triggering yet another admonishment from the judge.

Subscribe

DAY 7: Councilman Joe Jones and Police Oversight Failures Spotlighted

By Wednesday, the court ruled definitively on the Griffin matter — granting the motion to quash his subpoena but reaffirming the defense’s right to reference his past remarks. The defense quickly turned its attention to Cleveland Ward 1 Councilman Joseph Jones3, who offered a complex but ultimately supportive view of the defendants.

Jones testified about persistent crime and underinvestment in neighborhoods like Lee-Harvard. He explained that while he initially contacted police in August 2024 believing an “armed militia” was stationed outside the gas station, he later learned it was New Era. He admitted he did not understand the group’s mission at the time, but previously had a positive meeting with Chairman Faheim about human trafficking in Cleveland — a conversation so serious that Faheim had brought a mother of a trafficking victim to his office.

Jones described Faheim as “a positive person with great energy” and community commitment — a critical endorsement of character from a city official.

That day also featured testimony from Officer Whitney Detchon and Detective Anne Reynolds, who responded to the chaotic scene at the gas station on August 9 2024. While Reynolds initially claimed the gas station’s surveillance footage showed no sign of an assault or a gunshot, cross-examination by Pattakos revealed major oversights.

Using Officer Reynolds' own bodycam footage — Defense Exhibit G — Pattakos demonstrated that gas station co-owner Ibrahim Shehadeh appeared to strap a gun over his shoulder and walk off-screen moments before a gunshot rang out. Reynolds conceded that she had missed this detail during her initial investigation and admitted that had she noticed it at the time, she would have detained Shehadeh and seized the surveillance footage. She also confirmed that no gunshot residue (GSR) testing was conducted on the gas station owners.

This admission suggested a critical failure in the police response — one that potentially shifted suspicion away from the store owners and onto the New Era members.

DAY 8: Courtroom Chaos, Questionable Witnesses, and Disputed Evidence

Thursday began with a disruption. Alec Popivker4, a controversial Cleveland figure known for inflammatory remarks, was caught filming the proceedings with his phone — a violation of court rules. After being confronted, he stood and launched a tirade against the defendants, calling them “terrorists” and “jihadists.” The judge restored order, had the phone seized, and gave Popivker a choice: leave the courtroom permanently with his phone or remain silently without it. He chose to leave.

Back in session, the state called Sgt. Lance Estergall, who had responded to the gas station days after the incident. He admitted on cross that he witnessed no crime and had relied solely on hearsay from gas station owners.

Testimony from Detective James Donnolan, Lt. Michael Schwebs, and Officer David Morrison further damaged the prosecution’s narrative. Morrison, who responded to a July 27 incident involving a suspected drug dealer, testified that Tolbert and Askew had called police, were cooperative, and showed no criminal intent. He also confirmed that Tyrone Sims, the alleged dealer, was never charged — a point Pattakos used to question the prosecution’s priorities.

DAY 9: Rubin Swift Takes the Stand — and Unravels

Friday’s proceedings were dominated by the long-anticipated testimony of Rubin Swift5, a controversial figure with a criminal history including rape, bribery, insurance fraud, and robbery. Despite the prosecution’s effort to shield his past, Swift’s inconsistencies quickly came to light.

He portrayed himself as a member of the gas station’s “ownership team” despite having no official stake and being a felon barred from working as security. Swift claimed to act as “part of the ownership team who heads security”, but under cross-examination, admitted to not being paid for over two years, having no guard card, and possibly falsifying his role.

He repeatedly contradicted himself about his job history, financial status, and relationship with the gas station owners — even claiming he received a million-dollar insurance payout from a house fire and chose to continue working for free, “for family.” His statements verged on self-incrimination regarding tax evasion, unregistered employment, and more.

Swift also made inflammatory claims, calling New Era Cleveland a “terrorist group” and alleging Chairman Faheim had assaulted him — despite no physical evidence of any such attack. Officers on scene found no signs of injury, and Swift later admitted the incident “hurt his feelings more than his face.”

The judge has now ordered Swift to return Monday with financial records, including insurance payouts and payment documentation.

A Shifting Trial

By week’s end, the defense had cast serious doubt on the credibility of the state’s witnesses, highlighted possible investigatory failures by Cleveland police, and reinforced the image of the defendants as proactive community leaders — not criminals.

Attorney Peter Pattakos and his team continued to challenge the narrative that New Era Cleveland is a violent organization, arguing instead that the defendants were unfairly targeted for their organizing efforts in Black neighborhoods neglected by police.

The trial resumes Monday at 10 a.m. with continued testimony from Rubin Swift and more.

1BREAKING: Police oversight questioned in Cleveland landmark case; Defense exposes flawed police investigation in Antoine Tolbert/New Era Cleveland case Ruby Darwish Jul 16

CLEVELAND — In a critical development in the trial of Antoine Tolbert, also known as Chairman Faheim, testimony Wednesday revealed significant over…Read full story

2 https://www.clevelandcitycouncil.org/council/council-members/ward-6

3 https://www.clevelandcitycouncil.org/council/council-members/ward-1

4 cleveland.palestine - A post shared by @cleveland.palestine

5 https://web.archive.org/web/20250209112734/www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=3886