Attorneys Break Down Jonathan Majors’ Public Legal Strategy
The ongoing domestic violence case involving Jonathan Majors, renowned for his role as Ant-Man actor, remains a prominent topic of discussion within the court of public opinion. The news of Majors’ arrest on assault charges in March swiftly captivated media attention, generating extensive coverage.
Throughout this highly publicized ordeal, Priya Chaudry, Majors’ lead attorney, has demonstrated a willingness to openly discuss her legal team’s strategies, engaging with various media outlets ranging from TMZ to Business Insider.
Recognizing the significant visibility surrounding Majors’ legal representation, The Root sought insights from legal experts regarding their perspectives on Majors’ approach to a public defense strategy and the potential implications it may have for the case.
It’s risky to be this public, says New York criminal defense attorney Julie Rendelman. “There’s always a risk when you say too much,” says Rendelman. “Let’s suppose your client has told you something or you believe a witness is going to say something in your favor, and you don’t realize that the District Attorney has other evidence that is going to contradict what they’ve said; then you’ve put yourself in a sticky situation.”
However, the fact that Majors is a celebrity with a lot to lose does impact that calculation, says Rendelman.
“When you’re dealing with a public figure, there are two issues; it’s not just the criminal case, it’s also his potential future in terms of his private acting life and the celebrity aspect,” she says. “He also has his future career in mind, and I’m sure his attorneys do as well.”
Why Did They Release Video and Text Messages From The Alleged Victim?
One aspect of the case that’s garnered a lot of attention was his legal team’s decision to release video of the alleged victim at a bar the night of Majors’ arrest as well as text messages she allegedly sent to Majors.
There are a couple of ways you could read that choice, especially in regards to the video, says Leigh Goodmark, a law professor at the University of Maryland and a domestic violence expert. “On the one hand, it’s a way to get out ahead of the story,” says Goodmark. “on the other hand, it may be a way to say to her, don’t bother, don’t do this because we’re going to tear you up, it’s a way to send a message. It’s hard to know what the intent behind it is.”
His legal team has also hinged their strategy in arguing that her alleged decision to recant proves that she wasn’t abused. But Goodmark says it’s not that simple.
“There are many, many reasons why people don’t want to prosecute even in cases where they’ve been harmed, and we don’t know whether that’s the situation here or not,” she says, “but even assuming that she was genuinely harmed, there are hundreds of reasons why people choose not to go forward with the prosecution.”
According to her, numerous domestic violence survivors prefer to avoid involving themselves or their loved ones in the criminal justice system, particularly when the case involves a high-profile individual like Jonathan Majors.
She explains that when observing the fallout from cases such as Amber Heard’s, victims may be reluctant to subject themselves to similar media scrutiny and public attention. Ultimately, Goodmark emphasizes that the choice to pursue legal action should rest with the person who experienced the victimization.
Was It Smart To Make This Case About Race?
One widely publicized element of the case has revolved around Chaudry’s claim that her client was subjected to racial profiling by the New York Police Department.
In a letter addressed to the judge, which was made available to Business Insider, Chaudry contends that the police hastily assumed that Mr. Majors, an affluent young Black man who possessed a tall and robust stature, was undoubtedly responsible for the incident.”
Bringing race into a case like this is not a great strategy if you’re trying to win over a judge and jury, argues Former San Francisco Prosecutor Paul Henderson. “It’s a smart thing to do for PR but a dangerous thing to do in court,” explains Henderson.
Bringing race into this case allows the media to have a sympathetic hook, and it also gives a “back door” for companies “to continue supporting him,” he says. But in court, you’d have to back those assertions up and prove that race was a motivating factor and not say, her visible injuries.
A competent prosecutor would also bring up the fact that Majors isn’t like every other Black person on the street, he says. “I would…make sure that the jury remembers that we are not like Jonathan Majors; we are not millionaire stars walking on the street,” says Henderson.
Goodmark agrees that publicly calling the NYPD out for racism is a risky strategy. “It’s not something you see all the time in these cases because people tend to do be pretty risk averse,” she says, “about calling out racism in the system, when you’re at the mercy of that system.”
Goodmark agrees that publicly calling the NYPD out for racism is a risky strategy. “It’s not something you see all the time in these cases because people tend to do be pretty risk averse,” she says, “about calling out racism in the system, when you’re at the mercy of that system.”
source: http://www.theroot.com
Attorneys Break Down Jonathan Majors’ Public Legal Strategy
