The judge ruled that Ahmad Arbery’s past cannot be used by the defense in the McMichaels trial (update)

TSR Updatez: A judge ruled that the defense lawyer representing the three men accused of killing Ahmed Abery could not provide evidence related to the law in Ahmed’s past trials.

Back to May, We reported Defendants for the defendant killers Gregory and Travis McMichael and William “Rody” Bryan pleaded with the judge presiding over the case for permission to testify on Ahmed’s criminal history.

High Court Judge Timothy Walmsley’s recent decision was a major victory for prosecutors. They strongly opposed defense lawyers’ efforts to basically try Ahmed. Atlanta Magazine Constitution report.

But of course, the defense was not too satisfied with the judge’s decision. “Why the judge now decides that all his previous motives, his intentions, and his plans to do these things have nothing to do with this case, it is puzzling,” said Jason Sheffield, one of Travis McMichael’s lawyers.

“Now they will be denied the truth,” Sheffield said of the jurors of Ahmed’s intention to be chased and shot by these men on February day.

McMichaels’ lawyers insisted that their client had reason to pursue Ahmaud because they were arresting a citizen. After Greg McMichael saw Ahmed run into his street from the house under construction under several doors, the hunt began, and Ahmed’s family said he was just jogging.

In the court motion, the lawyers of the McMichaels cited 10 “bad acts” committed by Ahmed from 2013 to a few weeks before his death. These included Arbery’s admission of carrying a pistol in the school gymnasium, and in another case that he admitted to shoplifting.

In this week’s ruling, Walmsley pointed out that when the Mac and Michaels pursued him that day, they knew nothing about Ahmed’s past.

The judge wrote: “It is clear that the defendant intended to use the victim’s other actions in order to guess why Abery did it.”

Walmsley added that the defense is trying to obtain “evidence of obvious bad personality and tendencies” before the jury, which is an unfair prejudice. “In a murder trial, the character of the victim is neither relevant nor acceptable,” the judge wrote.

Wormsley said evidence about Ahmed’s past could also mislead the jury.

Although more hearings are expected, the case is scheduled to start in October. We will promptly notify you of any updates.

Want to update directly in your text inbox?Contact us at 917-722-8057 or Click here to join!