The short answer, you'll learn, is that all three defendants made decisions about Ahmaud because of the color of his skin.
AUSA notes that, though this is commonly described as a federal "hate crime" trial, the charge "does not require proof of hate."
"It requires that the defendant acted because of race."
AUSA quotes Travis McMichael using the N-word.
"Zero n***rs work with me. They ruin everything."
McMichael allegedly said he liked his contracting job because there's "not a n***r in sight."
He called Black people "criminals," "monkeys" and "sub-human savages," per AUSA.
Greg McMichael spoke derisively of civil rights leader Julian Bond, shocking an associate, the AUSA says.
AUSA says that gunman Travis McMichael referred to an image on social media of a man with a firecracker in his nose by saying:
"It would have been cooler if it blew the f***ing n****r’s head off."
AUSA:
Travis McMichael was "eager to blame the dead Black man for getting shot."
Greg McMichael said that the man on the ground was a "thief."
"Oh yeah, and that he probably stole" a gun from Travis's truck.
"You'll learn that none of that is true."
Bryan's lawyer James Pete Theodocion tells a jury he won't defend racism, quoted from the mouths of his client's co-defendants.
"I've heard the N-word more today than I've heard in three or more years."
"Racist tropes, slurs, opinions are really the lowest of human emotions."
Theodocion:
"With Roddie Bryan, you won't see a man who sees the entire world through the prism of race."
(Note: Bryan was the only man convicted of Arbery's murder who has the possibility of parole after 30 years, after what a judge determined to be his lesser role.)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
During pre-trial arguments, the NYT's lawyer argues that someone known for saying "Don’t retreat, reload" will have a hard time arguing that she sustained emotional damage in the face of criticism about her gun rhetoric.
The NYT wants to grill Palin on rhetoric like that to establish that Palin "plays in the public field" and "uses hyperbole" to make her points.
Q: When you used the word “incite,” were you intending to convey only that “incite” meant direct orders?
A: No, no. You can incite hate. You can incite anger. You can incite passion. You can even incite doubt. [...] Incite requires an object as a verb.
Bennet:
"We were focused on [...] rhetoric on the left, which had become much hotter in the period. Things were worse. Things are worse today than they were then in 2017. [...]
We were focused on rhetoric on the left—and the right, but particularly on the left that day."
Out the gate, Palin's attorney Shane Vogt asks Bennet if it would surprise him for readers to interpret the word "incitement" to mean its dictionary definition.
"It wouldn't surprise me," he replies.
Vogt presses Bennet of any evidence of rhetoric on the left that could be tied to the 2017 congressional baseball shooting by James Hodgkinson.
After a back and forth, Bennet ultimately agrees they didn't find any.
The Michael Avenatti jury returns a note suggesting that there's one female holdout juror, whom the rest of the panel says is refusing to deliberate and won't consider the evidence.
Avenatti moves for a mistrial.
Judge Furman just denied that motion.
The judge considers instructing them not to be swayed by sympathy or emotion.
Avenatti objects.
Furman asks wryly whether it's Avenatti's position that a juror should let sympathy or emotion interfere with clear thinking.
Furman says Avenatti seems to believe the holdout is leaning toward acquittal.
For all he knows, the judge says, the juror allegedly swayed by emotion is in favor of conviction.