Colin Gray Defense: Colt Gray 'Is The Person Who Needs to Be Punished'
Why It Matters
The verdict will shape how far prosecutors can go in charging caregivers for a child’s independent violent acts and test the threshold for criminally negligent storage or supervision in fatal shootings. It also carries local and legal consequences for accountability in high-profile school shootings and the standards juries apply amid emotional testimony.
Summary
In a closing defense argument for Colin Gray, attorneys urged jurors to uphold the presumption of innocence and require the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Gray knew his son would carry out the Parkland-style school shooting. The defense highlighted legal elements the jury must find—criminal negligence, proximate cause and a “gross deviation”—and stressed that merely having a gun or ammunition in the home is not a crime under Georgia law. Counsel pointed to the absence of direct warnings in roughly 60,000 pages of texts, argued much of the testimony was speculation, and noted the shooter, Colt, who the defense called secretive and manipulative, was the person who should be punished. The team also noted limitations in evidence about Colt’s mental health and that the younger shooter could not be called to provide his account.
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...