penalty for theft, for which they were admonished by the court. i m not trying to rub it in, but i would suggest that given all of the cheap shots and all the misstatements, i won t say they re knowing. you won t be jumping any assumptions but given all the cheap shots against mr. bryan, i would hope that when ms. dunikos cyhas the last word here that you ll hold her accountable and that you will not accept her tolerate any more cheap shots when i have no opportunity to respond. again, i m going to posit these three questions to you. when did roddie bryan know the mcmichaels brought guns? when did roddie bryan know travis mcmichael would shoot mr. arbery? and at that point, what could roddie bryan possibly have done to stop it?
nine and i ll address each of the underlying or predicate felonies in a moment. but right now i want to talk about something called proximate cause. because to support any of the felony murder counts, there has to be a causal relationship to the death of ahmaud arbery. and there is no such relationship in this case. without trying to put words in the court s mouth, i think the court is going to charge you i m not there yet. you may find the defendant guilty of felony murder if you believe that mr. bryan caused the death of mr. arbery, regardless of whether mr. bryan intended the death to occur. that s felony murder. there must be some causal connection between the felony and the death. the court, i believe, will instrict you that felony murder is not established simply because the death occurred at the same time or shortly after the felony was attempted or committed. the burden on the state such
greater. the felony must have been directly caused or must have directly caused the death or play both a substantial and necessary part in causing the death. in this case you may also consider whether any intervening act, whether on the part of the mcmichaels or mr. arbery were causal to break the chain of events. i believe both of the lawyers that preceded me for the mcmichael defendants have pointed out the error in the state s argument here. listen carefully to the court s charge. the words but for appear nowhere in that charge. they are not to be found. why? because but for is not the standard. it s too easy a standard.
bryan s truck in evidence, but if there is i m sure ms. dunikoski will provide that. nobody has been looking for that evidence because there was no crime to investigate. there are no witnesses. nobody will testify they saw mr. bryan drive aggressively or recklessly. no neighbors will testify to that because it didn t happen. we have a neighborhood chock full of security videos. none of them catch this aggressive driving. what does the medical examiner tell us? the medical examiner testified extensively in this trial. he testified, i believe, that the pickup truck could be a deadly weapon depending on the manner in which it was used. that s consistent with the charge this court will give you. but what evidence is there that mr. bryan did, in fact, injure mr. arbery? i don t recall there being any testimony any of physical injuries to mr. arbery attributable to mr. bryan s actions. the cause of death was gunshot. let s talk about the fingerprint evidence for a moment.
although mr. bryan did all those things, that s not a false imprisonment. among other things, mr. bryan with his own vehicle can t do that on his own. and we know that the mcmichael vehicle has gone back down to zellwood and all the way around. which is why mr. arbery t. the court will charge you on the law with respect to false imprisonment. this is count eight. the mcmichael attorneys have already gone over this in some detail. i ll try to avoid that same ground. first, where there is no confinement, no detention, there can be no false imprisonment. that s the law. mr. arbery never really stopped. he never submitted. i think the state s position was that mr. arbery resisted to the end of his life.