« ‘Reasonableness’ seems like a simple word, but it plays the most significant role in determining this case, » former federal prosecutor Michael McAuliffe said.
Jury deliberations in the case of Ahmaud Arbery’s death began on Tuesday after a lengthy trial involving different defense attorneys for each of the three defendants and now, it will be up to the jurors to decide on the reasonableness of the actions of the three men who are accused of killing Arbery. While the prosecution has argued that Arbery, who was Black, was gunned down and fatally shot on February 23, 2020 because of his race, the defendants have contended they acted in self-defense while executing a « citizen’s arrest. » « Self-defense is a central issue in the case, at least based on the defendants’ presentations and arguments, » former federal prosecutor and former elected state attorney Michael McAuliffe told Newsweek. « The evidence shows one of the defendants shot and killed Mr. Arbery, » he said. « The real decision in the case is whether, despite committing the actions alleged, the defendants were legally justified in doing those acts––here killing Mr. Arbery. » In order for a self-defense argument to be successful, jurors would have to determine that the threat Arbery posed to the McMichaels and Bryan was enough to justify their actions in killing the 25-year-old. During the trial, the defense argued that Arbery’s attempts to confront Travis McMichael and potentially take his shotgun is enough to constitute an imminent and deadly threat.
