MOBILE, Ala. — A federal jury began deliberations Thursday in a wrongful-death civil trial surrounding the fatal shooting of Jonathan Victor by Baldwin County sheriff’s deputy Cpl. Matthew Hunady. The trial stems from a May 2017 incident on Interstate 10, where Hunady shot Victor during a tense standoff after a single-vehicle accident.
The central question before jurors is whether Hunady’s actions constituted excessive force. Both sides acknowledged key details from dashcam and bodycam footage but clashed on their interpretations.
During closing arguments, plaintiff’s lawyer Jack Samuel Tenenbaum argued that Victor, a Louisiana resident, should not have died. He displayed a large photograph of Victor for the jury and asked for $4.75 million in compensatory damages, contingent on a ruling of fault against Hunady. U.S. Magistrate Judge William Cassady instructed jurors to apply a “more likely than not” standard when weighing the evidence, which differs from the higher bar of “beyond a reasonable doubt” used in criminal cases.
Defense attorney J. Randall McNeil acknowledged that Victor’s death was tragic, yet contended that the events leading to the shooting were instigated by Victor himself. He pointed out that Victor was experiencing a mental health crisis, having refused multiple commands from Hunady to exit his vehicle.
“This is not the man who law enforcement officers saw on May 12, 2017,” McNeil emphasized, asserting that Victor’s demeanor and actions indicated he posed a risk. He referred to footage that showed Victor approaching Hunady with his hands in a position that suggested he could be armed, ultimately holding only a fanny pack.
Jurors saw evidence of Hunady instructing Victor repeatedly to comply, but Victor’s response, “You drop it,” raised questions about his state of mind at the time. McNeil insisted that any officer in Hunady’s position would have acted similarly and urged jurors to disregard the plaintiffs’ expert testimony, arguing it lacked common sense.
Conversely, Tenenbaum called for jurors to consider the broader context of Hunady’s actions before the shooting, questioning why a hostage negotiator was not called or why another non-lethal option, like a Taser, was not employed.
“Time is on your side,” he said, emphasizing the importance of gathering information rather than escalating the confrontation.
As deliberations concluded for the evening, the jury was set to reconvene at 9 a.m. on Friday to continue their discussions about the critical issues surrounding this case.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested to be removed, retracted, or corrected by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.