Testimony about texts, surveillance and a police interview gave the clearest public view yet of the prosecution’s theory.
MUSKEGON, Mich. — A preliminary examination in the killing of Thomas Stewart gave the public its clearest look yet at the evidence against a 16-year-old defendant, as prosecutors used testimony about a text message, surveillance footage and an alleged admission to tie him to the fatal shooting.
The hearing mattered because it moved the case beyond the bare outline released after Stewart was found dead in his home on Dec. 1, 2025. Until then, police had said only that Stewart, 73, was likely robbed and that a teenage suspect who knew him had been charged as an adult. In court, investigators added a more detailed sequence: where the suspect was seen before the shooting, what he allegedly said after it and how prosecutors believe a robbery inside the house turned deadly. The proceeding also spilled into another case when a 17-year-old witness was reportedly arrested for perjury after giving testimony that clashed with investigators’ account.
By the time the hearing began, the homicide case had already traveled a familiar path from emergency response to arrest. Officers were dispatched to the 1400 block of Jiroch Street at about 9:30 a.m. on Dec. 1 after a report that a man had been shot inside a residence. They found Stewart with a gunshot wound to the upper body, and he was pronounced dead at the scene. Investigators later said his wallet was found near his body and that his pockets had been turned out. On Dec. 8, police arrested a 16-year-old after what authorities described as a flight from a traffic stop. Prosecutors then charged Kemaree Davis as an adult with open murder and armed robbery. A 17-year-old tied to the investigation was separately booked on a firearm charge. Those early steps established the skeleton of the case. The hearing filled in muscle and nerve.
At the center of the court testimony was the prosecution’s effort to place Davis in a chain of actions before, during and after Stewart’s death. A detective testified that surveillance footage showed Davis and the 17-year-old meeting outside Muskegon High School on the morning of the shooting and walking toward Stewart’s home. That evidence was designed to place the two teens together before the killing. The prosecution then moved to what investigators say happened afterward. According to the detective’s testimony, Davis sent a message roughly an hour after the shooting that said, “The old man is dead. Bro, I watched him gasp his last breath.” Prosecutors said the message went to the same 17-year-old who also faced the weapons charge. In the same hearing, investigators said Davis later told police that Stewart saw him inside the home, gave him $20 and that the gun went off during the robbery. They also said he admitted taking another $20 from Stewart’s wallet after Stewart was shot.
A courthouse story also depends on conflict, and that came from the second teen’s account. The 17-year-old reportedly testified in a way that did not match what investigators said their digital and surveillance evidence showed. He claimed he did not remember meeting Davis that morning and denied knowledge of several social media accounts linked to his cellphone. That mattered because prosecutors appear to view those accounts and communications as part of the proof connecting the teens to each other and to the events surrounding Stewart’s death. After the hearing, the 17-year-old was reportedly arrested on a perjury allegation, a move that suggested authorities believed the discrepancies were serious enough to become a case of their own. Public reporting has not fully answered how that allegation may affect the homicide prosecution, whether the witness will cooperate later or whether additional charges could be sought against others. Those questions remain open as the record develops.
Stepping back from the hearing, the facts already made public point to a case built on overlapping forms of evidence rather than a single dramatic piece. There is scene evidence suggesting robbery, according to police. There is video evidence that prosecutors say tracks the movements of the suspect and a second teen before the shooting. There are alleged statements to police that place Davis inside the house. There is the reported text, which prosecutors are treating as a blunt account of what happened. And there is context from investigators who said Stewart likely knew the suspect and may have let him inside. That last point helps explain why authorities did not initially describe a forced entry. It also adds a layer of betrayal to the case, which resonated deeply in Muskegon because Stewart was remembered by neighbors and relatives as a kind, helpful man who was familiar to many in the area.
What comes next is more procedural but no less important. Davis, charged as an adult with open murder and armed robbery, must continue through the Michigan court process, where judges will weigh whether the prosecution has shown probable cause and whether the matter will move toward trial. Open murder leaves room for prosecutors to argue later about the degree of homicide supported by the evidence. The separate firearm case involving the 17-year-old, along with his reported perjury arrest, may continue on a parallel track. The public still does not know whether the gun has been found or whether prosecutors believe the robbery was planned in advance by more than one person. Those answers may emerge only through additional hearings, motions and disclosure as the case moves forward.
The preliminary examination has changed the public understanding of the case from a broad accusation into a more detailed prosecution narrative. The next key step is further court review in Muskegon County as judges decide how far that narrative will carry.
Author note: Last updated April 7, 2026.