A Manhattan trial was recently thrown into chaos by the revelation of “largely sexual, pornographic” videos — starring a juror and the wannabe-killer defendant.
The criminal, with the help of his mom, tried using the seamy footage to overturn his conviction in a situation that stunned even his veteran lawyer.
But the judge wouldn’t budge — and Avery Dunning, 37, now faces up to 25 years in prison for shooting his 41-year-old female East Harlem neighbor in the head during a 2023 fight.
The saga has been a “situation stranger than fiction,’’ said Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Daniel Conviser.
The bizarre ordeal began after the trial ended and right as Dunning was set to be sentenced in July.
That’s when his lawyer alerted the court that Dunning’s mother, Lolita Dunning, had found raunchy videos of her son and Juror No. 8, a woman who had previously told the court that she didn’t recognize the defendant during jury selection.
It turns out she knew the defendant — quite well.
Dunning’s lawyer, Raymond Loving, said in court Thursday that Dunning and the juror had previously recorded 15 “pornographic videos” together, with some of the erotic footage showing the woman pleasuring his client.
“These videos show Mr. Dunning receiving fellatio from a juror,” Loving said. “It’s clear that she had an intimate relationship with a man who she was later called for jury service.”
The stunning revelation surfaced just weeks after the juror and the rest of the panel convicted Dunning of attempted murder, assault and other charges for shooting his neighbor when she and her husband confronted him about allegedly beating his girlfriend in their building.
The jury deliberated two days before finding Dunning guilty on all counts.
As the judge was preparing to sentence him, the videos surfaced.
Over the course of several ensuing hearings, Dunning, his mother and the juror testified before lawyers from both sides and Judge Conviser.
The skin flicks, which were filmed by Dunning on two occasions, were viewed by the lawyers and judge at some point but ordered kept from public view.
At one hearing Aug. 20, the juror — who showed up to court wearing a mask while complaining of illness — admitted she had a “one-night stand” with Dunning at her Harlem home in 2022 after the pair had met on Lenox Avenue.
She claimed she never recognized him during the month-long trial — until the jury reached its verdict and she had a “clear view” of him as she walked by the defense table.
The woman never disclosed to the court during jury selection that she knew Dunning. It is typical for a judge to ask prospective jurors if they recognize or know the lawyers or defendants involved in the case.
If a juror is familiar with someone, they are typically excused from service.
In a bid to have Dunning’s conviction tossed, his lawyer claimed “gross juror misconduct” had occurred, saying there was no possible way the juror couldn’t have know who his client was at all for the entire duration of the trial.
“Of course, she recognized him,” Loving said.
But Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Andrea Kimmel insisted that Dunning kept quiet about his previous relationship with the juror until after his conviction to “defraud the court.’’
“He has sandbagged this court,” Kimmel seethed. “He withheld this information to only use it if the verdict wasn’t in his favor.”
But the dopey gunman left a bread-crumb trail for prosecutors to find.
Dunning called his mom a month before his conviction and appeared to allude to the videos in a cryptic tone, warning her, “You’re gonna see something you might not want to see,” prosecutors said.
Inmates’ phone calls from jail are sometimes monitored by authorities.
Dunning’s mom searched through her son’s personal phone — and that’s when she found the sex-fueled videos and showed them to his lawyer, the attorney said.
Prosecutors meanwhile defended the juror, who testified she believed Dunning’s name to be “Ace” since he used it on social media.
“This is not something he inadvertently held back,’’ Kimmel told the judge of Dunning’s videos. “This is something he pocketed to use as a strategic, tactical advantage.’’
Conviser agreed, denying the defense’s motion to dismiss despite acknowledging there was “some degree of a sexual relationship” between Dunning and the juror.
“That’s what this was – deception and defraud of the court,” the judge said of Dunning’s actions. “He could have easily taken care of this whole issue by just telling us what had happened instead of keeping it secret.”
Attempts to reach Lolita Dunning were unsuccessful.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office declined to comment.
Dunning’s lawyer said that they plan to appeal the conviction.
“I’ve been doing this for 30 plus years. This is the first case of this type that I’ve had,” Loving said after the hearing.