after he was shot. was it a mistake not to bring race into this in a bigger way from the prosecution or was there was she working under a different strategy? well, the only strategy that i can think she was working under, which is an important strategy is her audience is a jury of 12 people. whatever we may feel outside of that group is not relevant to what the prosecution s argument was. she is tailoring her comments to that group of 12 people who are now sitting and possibly have a verdict in this case. one of those persons is african-american. you really would have to be slapped in the head to not realize that race permeates throughout this case. she chose, with 11 white jurors and 1 african-american juror not to make that a big issue because it quite frankly is obvious. but she chose to try this case on the evidence because you would reach the same conclusion based on the evidence there that race permeates throughout the
here. the mother of ahmaud arbery. it is quiet and tense. any words have been kept to a whisper. the room is jam packed. people are squeezing in. folks are switching places and nervously clasping their hands together. the family have been waiting for this for so long. we talked about this as a 13-day trial. some of these jurors were part of this jury selection a month ago. this has been a long process for so many people. i think a lot of people will be eager to get on with this, katy. we have danny savalos. there you are, danny. nice to have you here. this is some relatively quick deliberation. not exactly. the vast majority of cases do resolve relatively quickly, usually within a day or so. the rittenhouse case was kind of an outlier, for me at least. in my experience, juries are not out for several days like that. but i suspect we may never know. the fact this is wednesday
were these your verdicts then, and are these your verdicts now? yes, your honor. juror number 10, you have heard the verdicts read. were these your verdicts then, and are these your verdicts now? yes, your honor. juror number 11, you have heard the verdicts read. were these your verdicts then, and are these your verdicts now? yes, your honor. juror number 12, you have heard the verdicts read. were these your verdicts then, and are these your verdicts now? yes, your honor. and juror 16, you have heard the verdicts read. were these your verdicts then, and are these your verdicts now? yes, sir. the jury has been polled. anything further from the defense? no, your honor. all right. ladies and gentlemen, what that means with the court having accepted your verdict is that your role in this case is now at
evidence so compelling, and the federal interest in the case not fully vindicated because the state case was a murder case. the federal case will be predicated on hate crimes, on a civil rights violation. and so, completely appropriate here for the federal government to proceed even though they already have a conviction in state court. whatever happens in the federal system, these men are going to jail, very likely, for the rest of their lives. so what happens if they are found guilty federally? does that add time to their prison sentence? not practically. i mean, yes, and calculation will be life in the state system plus whatever they get in the federal system. as a practical matter, though, katy, it s not going to change things very much. you can t really serve life and then serve another sentence of life, you only have one life to live, and they ll live it in jail. it s the federal government s
juries. tell us what we should know looking in from the outside. i think what is important, very important to note is that the citizens arrest law is something that s not was not well known at the time of ahmaud arbery s killing. and, so, that citizen s arrest law is being tried in this case. i think it is very interesting that the jury asked to look at the videos and asked to listen to the 911 call as well as the audio. all of those three pieces of evidence, if you will, point to the citizens arrest law, whether it is valid, and also point to the defense of self-defense under georgia law. those are three critical pieces of evidence. if i m the defense right now, i m feeling uneasy that the jurors wanted to listen to and see that evidence. and, so, either we ve got descension in the room and somebody needs to be persuaded on one side or the other by that