Buffalo, N.Y. (WBEN) - Lawyers in the federal death penalty case surrounding the gunman in the Tops mass shooting on May 14, 2022 deliberated in court Tuesday the constitutionality of the hate crime criteria in this case.
Defense lawyers representing the 20-year-old gunman, Payton Gendron, questioned whether or not the hate crime criteria in this case has properly met the certifications when it comes to the "public interest".
With Gendron already having pled guilty in New York State court and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for murder as a hate crime, the defense asks whether or not the justification meet the standard to pursue the death penalty at the federal level.
The constitutionality surrounding the case arises with whether or not the hate crime criteria also meets a standard higher than what was determined in State Supreme Court. One of the matters questioned surrounding the constitutionality of the case was how the 13th amendment in the U.S. Constitution may apply.
After a little more than 45 minutes of deliberation, Hon. Lawrence Vilardo said he would read up more on the arguments presented to him before coming to any decision on the matter.
Garnell Whitfield, former Buffalo Fire Commissioner and son of Ruth Whitfield - one of the 10 victims of the racially motivated shooting - feels the standard of this case being in the public interest has to be met, while also securing justice for the families and the public.
"Without the federal prosecution, there would be no disclosure of the discovery. There would be no disclosure of all of the evidence that's been procured in this case. I very much believe that's in the public interest to have that revealed, to have that shown so we can find out what, who, where, was supportive of the actions of this person," said Whitfield while speaking with reporters outside the Robert H. Jackson Federal Courthouse on Tuesday. "I think that's important to get that out in the public record so we know what helped him do what he did. Without this trial going forward, that would not be the case.
"I'm not standing here talking about the death penalty. I'm talking about revealing the evidence that has been procured - mounds of evidence, tons of evidence that has been gathered - on behalf of the government, on behalf of the public, that should be revealed and should be seen by us. By all of us. I think that's necessary. There can be no justice without that."
In addition to the arguments heard Tuesday, Vilardo asked the defense counsel to have an affidavit signed by Gendron before the next court appearance that shows the waiving of his rights to appear before the court.
Whether Gendron is present or not for these matters in federal court is immaterial to Whitfield.
"He's not the focus of me being here. I'm here because they challenged the constitutionality of the charges. That's what I'm here for," he said. "As far as he's concerned, as they said, he's got life sentence and he's not getting out of jail. Whatever happens to him is between him and his God. That's not why I'm here. I'm here because I want to see justice, and justice, to me, is going to be finding out what supported him, how he did what he did. Those are the things we should be going after."
It is also likely that deadlines for certain pre-trial motions associated with the federal death penalty case will need to be extended.
Local News
Comments / 0