Jury selection begins in federal hate crimes trial for murder of Ahmaud Arbery

Read the Full Transcript

• Judy Woodruff:

  Jury selection began today in the federal hate crimes trial for three white men in Georgia already convicted in state court of murdering Ahmaud Arbery, who was black.

  William Brangham has the story.

• William Brangham:

  Judy, last month, Travis McMichael, Greg McMichael and William "Roddie" Bryan were sentenced in a Georgia state court to life in prison for chasing down and murdering Arbery.

  This federal trial will look at whether the killings were racially motivated, which wasn't addressed in the state case. The Justice Department has charged the three men with hate crimes and attempting kidnapping.

  Deval Patrick used to prosecute these types of cases as the former assistant attorney general for civil rights under Bill Clinton. He is also the former governor of Massachusetts and now co-chairs American Bridge 21st Century, which is a Democratic Party organization.

  Deval Patrick, very good to you have back on the "NewsHour."

  So, the DOJ is prosecuting this as a hate crime. And is it my understanding that the prosecutors then have to prove that these defendants had racist beliefs in their heart when they committed this murder?

• FMR. GOV. Deval Patrick (D-MA):

  That motivated the murder.

  And there is evidence of this in this case. And that, in itself, has been deemed a federal interest, deserving of punishment.

• William Brangham:

  So, is it your sense that, if the state prosecutors had introduced a potential racist motivation for this killing, that the Department of Justice might not have been interested in pursuing this?

• FMR. GOV. Deval Patrick:

  You know, it is such an interesting question and I will bet it is the very kind of question that the department struggled with, because, to some extent, the racial animus in the state trial, which was a straight prosecution for murder, is not relevant.

  It is additional color, but it doesn't make it — it is not outcome-determinative, if you will, William. These are difficult cases in that sense. But they are important ones to bring, because of, as I was saying earlier, the federal interest expressed in this legislation to punish racially motivated criminal behavior.

  And that is what this was. There was evidence of it available to state prosecutors. But they made a judgment not to use it because they — well, I am informing — because it wasn't necessary to prove the case that was before the state court and jury.

• William Brangham:

  But help me understand the concerns some viewers might have, which is, these three men have been prosecuted for murder. They are all going to go away for life in prison.

  So, what is the — what is the important of bringing a separate case that may not add anything to their prison time?

• FMR. GOV. Deval Patrick:

  Well, it is not just about adding to their prison time, although, sometimes, it is, in this case, apparently not.

  But it is also making it clear that we are going to care about and we are going to enforce that federal interest in racially motivated violence. And that has been an issue in this country for a long, long time. Getting these laws on the books was a struggle for a long, long time.

  And you can imagine how the situations go. Sometimes — let's just suppose that the decision had gone the other way in the state court, and the defendants had been acquitted. Will they then be arguing that the federal prosecution shouldn't go forward?

• William Brangham:

  You prosecuted a bunch of these cases when you were in the Department of Justice. Are these tough cases to prove, to prove the motivating intent behind a crime?

• FMR. GOV. Deval Patrick:

  Yes.

  Beyond the fact that there is intention, a lot of times, the juries don't want to hear about the racism behind it. That has been true for a long, long time. You — let's just deal with the consequences, not let's deal with the reasons for the motivation.

  And that's been a blind spot, if you will, for a long time in this country. These cases are really hard. They aren't — at least when I was there and I think still today, they aren't pursued lightly. They aren't pursued often.

  And there is a difference to state courts to see whether state authorities are going to take the action, and federal authorities don't have to bring a case that is quite as close.

  For example, William, I can understand in this case why it is the federal prosecutor tried to reach a plea agreement. I can understand it. I can also understand why Mr. Arbery's mother said no.

• William Brangham:

  This was a plea agreement that they had — that the men had said, we will plead guilty and admit that we had racial animus in our minds and hearts when we committed the crime.

  The judge threw out that plea.

• FMR. GOV. Deval Patrick:

  Correct. Correct.

  Very, very unusual, William, to have the defendants not just agree to the plea, but agree to admit to the racial animus. Very unusual. As I understand it, the counsel for the family at least initially indicated a willingness to support the deal.

  But when Mrs. Arbery learned that they would be serving their term in a federal prison, which is not a comfortable place, but a lot better facility than the state facility, she said no. And the judge accepted that.

• William Brangham:

  All right, Deval Patrick, former Massachusetts governor and former member of the Department of Justice, thank you so much for joining us.

• FMR. GOV. Deval Patrick:

  Thank you, William.