KENT COUTNY, Mich. – Jury deliberations began Monday afternoon after the prosecution and defense delivered their closing arguments in the murder trial in the death of Patrick Lyoya.
Lyoya, a 26-year-old Congolese refugee, was shot and killed by a Grand Rapids Police Officer during a traffic stop in April 2022.
Recommended Videos
The former officer, Christopher Schurr, was charged with second-degree Murder in Lyoya’s death.
Defense rested their case Monday morning and both sides delivered their closing arguments.
The jury finished their first day of deliberations on Monday and will resume on Tuesday morning.
Prosecution closing argument
Prosecutors argued that when Schurr fired the shot, he intended to kill.
“I hope we’re not callous,” said the prosecutor. “Clearly, the defendant killed Patrick Lyoya.”
He said Lyoya was trying to get away, not attack Schurr. He also said he didn’t pose as a threat.
The prosecution showed screenshots of the bodycam footage of Lyoya trying to keep the taser away from him. They claim Lyoya had no intent to use it on Schurr but just to keep it away from him.
Prosecutors claimed that Schurr knew he was outnumbered, and the policy for the Grand Rapids Police Department states that if an officer is outnumbered and the subject could be dangerous, they should take a step back.
Prosecutors pointed out experts testified that backup should have responded to help him and Schurr should not have engaged until he had help.
Prosecutors agreed that Lyoya did break the law but said it should not be the reason to be killed.
Defense closing argument
“The prosecutors are trying to make this case something it’s not.”
The defense told the jury to note that Schurr made the decision based on belief and fear for his life.
“Nobody is arguing that someone should be executed for drinking and driving,” said the defense. “The issue is whether or not if Schurr was in fear.”
He said the defense and prosecution agreed Schurr had a valid reason to pull over Lyoya. However, the defense argued that Lyoya never mentioned he had car problems during the traffic stop in hopes of reasoning with Schurr as to why he was outside of his car when he was pulled over.
The defense argued Schurr didn’t know the situation, so he had the right to be questionable.
“His job is to arrest,” said the defense. “Why did Lyoya run? He doesn’t know. He doesn’t even know his name.”
“It’s his job to arrest people who are committing crimes,” he continued.
The defense said Schurr had the right to attempt an arrest on Lyoya based on the evidence that Lyoya did not have a license and the car’s license plate didn’t match the car he was driving.
The defense also argued that Lyoya was holding the taser like a gun, leading to Schurr’s reasoning to believe his life was in danger.
Throughout the trial, it’s been claimed that the taser is a weapon and should be something to fear. If used improperly, the taser can cause blindness or even death.
The defense said Schurr had no idea why Lyoya was fighting and didn’t have time to figure it out.
The jury was shown the taser training to show what Schurr was thinking when Lyoya had ahold of the taser and why he should fear it.
“An officer does not have to wait to use deadly force.”
The defense attorney snapped his fingers and said, “That’s how much time he’s got to decide.”
The defense said the jury needs to consider that this case focuses on the decision to use deadly force, not the location or how it was done.
Schurr testified he did everything he could to prevent from using deadly force.
The defense attorney urged the jury to make the decision based on the evidence of whether or not this was beyond reasonable doubt.
“If you have a sliver of reasonable doubt, you should acquit,” he said. “You must acquit him of both charges.”
Rebuttal from prosecutors
The defense said prosecutors’ experts couldn’t agree whether the use of deadly force was justifiable. Prosecutors argued in rebuttal that the defense’s witnesses are no different regarding their creditability.
The prosecution said no reasonable officer would kill someone.
Prosecutors pointed out that in Schurr’s graduation video, where he had to get tased to learn the intensity of a taser, music was playing in the background, and everyone in the video was smiling. He questioned why they were having fun if it was considered a deadly weapon.
Prosecutors ended his rebuttal by saying Lyoya was not a threat.
