And now, it's up to the jurors
Here's the latest on Williamson and Williamson, which has taken up an awful lot of my attention and time as of late. I'll keep you posted on where things go.
Today, 12 jurors should take control of the next twist in the tale of two fathers and two sons.
One father, Filemon Ramos, is dead; his son, Filiberto, is recovering from wounds suffered on the evening of June 25, 2006. The other father, Alvaro Williamson, is on trial for murder and attempted murder; his 18-year-old son, Jacques, sits beside him at the defendants' table, accused of providing his father with the murder weapon.
It took nearly a month for the case of the long-running feud between Arleta neighbors to play out in court. This week, in San Fernando Superior Court, lawyers went through their final arguments before handing judgment over to the jurors, who are expected to begin deliberation today.
"There were two dads out there on that particular day...," Deputy District Attorney Paula Gonzales said in her closing argument Tuesday afternoon. "Two different fathers, acting in two different ways. One as a criminal, with his son as his co-criminal at his side."
Here's the whole thing.
As I mentioned in yesterday's post, the relationship between the two defendants puts the two attorneys in a very awkward spot. I get the sense that they're painfully aware of this, as well.
So here's my take on it (and, keep in mind, I just watch this stuff, I have no legal training).... Alvaro Williamson's testimony is that Jacques got the gun out of the car, he grabbed it away, then the shooting went down. Grimes needs to hit that home with the jury, that he was trying to protect his son, or his "baby," as the attorney put it. If he can do that, then they're probably more likely to give him a lesser murder charge or manslaughter.
Shapiro, on the other hand, has to push as much of the blame onto Big Al as he can, minimizing Jacques' exposure. He needs the jury to see Jacques as an innocent kid, afraid to disobey his ex-Marine dad. And to do that, he needs to make the dad look like the guilty one.
That's not that uncommon with multiple defendants, I suppose, but this isn't something like a gang murder or a fraud conspiracy. In those cases, the defendants are much likely to be every-man-for-himself, throwing the blame on each other to minimize their own culpability.
But how do you do that when the co-defendants are father and son? An injury to one is an injury to both, presumably. If Grimes does a great job, the jury believes him and gives Alvaro Williamson a lesser charge, then heaps more of the blame onto Jacques, the Williamson family isn't going to be thrilled. If Shapiro wins over the jury by making Jacques seem like he was just caught up in the middle, then his client's dad will be going away for a long time.
Not a fun situation, huh? There goes any aspirations I'd ever have to go to law school, that's for sure. I'll let you know what the jury has to say, as well.
Leave a comment