Would you convict Susan Lorincz? Here’s what the jury is being told

Jurors are expected to begin deliberations as soon as lunchtime Friday in the manslaughter trial against Susan Lorincz, who shot and killed her neighbor through a locked door last summer.

▶ WATCH CHANNEL 9 EYEWITNESS NEWS

Lorincz is facing 30 years in prison if she is convicted but maintains her position that she believed her life was threatened as Owens pounded on her front door, and the shooting should fall under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. She opted not to testify in her own defense, though that did not come as a surprise to court observers.

Many of the details about the shooting and the victim, Ajike Owens, were made public long before witnesses were sworn in. However, not all of those details were allowed to enter the courtroom.

Here’s what facts have been highlighted over the three days of testimony – and what the jury will likely prioritize as it weighs its decision.

Read: Susan Lorincz: Defense presents arguments in trial of woman who fatally shot neighbor through door

The jury

The jury is made up of four men and two women, all white . Two women are serving as alternates, but they haven’t been needed so far. Most of the jury appears to be older than 40.

At least two of the jurors are gun owners, which could influence their opinions on some of the testimony. Three jurors have ties to law enforcement.

The charge and Stand Your Ground law

Under Florida law, “manslaughter” happens when a person kills another human being, and the killing was inexcusable or unjustified.

Florida’s Stand Your Ground law provides a shield from criminal prosecution when the killer “reasonably” believes the other person is about to harm or kill them or commit a crime that involves violence like arson or robbery.

Lorincz’s charge is upgraded because she used a gun. Her involvement in the shooting is not in question. The trial centers on whether her claim that she was afraid for her life was reasonable.

Read: Prosecutors use Susan Lorincz’s own words against her, rest case

The case against Lorincz

In their efforts to put Lorincz in prison, prosecutors have built a complex web around her claims and attempted to cut off her arguments piece by piece rather than create a coherent narrative for jurors to follow.

A summary of the claims and discoveries detectives made:

• Lorincz filmed the neighborhood kids playing near her home repeatedly for hours before the shooting
• Lorincz swung an umbrella at some of the kids
• Lorincz threw a roller skate at or near one child
• Owens went to Lorincz’s house to confront her after being told about the skate and that Lorincz stole one child’s tablet
• Owens never verbally threatened Lorincz’s life
• Owens did not continuously pound on Lorincz’s front door
• Deputies were already on the way to the situation after Lorincz called 911 to report the kids for trespassing and were just minutes from arriving
• Lorincz never mentioned her life being in danger, despite her initial insistence one of the children threatened her
• Owens did not attempt to enter Lorincz’s home and, in fact, was asking her to come outside
• Lorincz walked around her home for several minutes as Owens stood outside
• Lorincz’s door had a brand-new deadbolt lock with three-inch screws, making it difficult to kick in
• Owens did not bang on the door hard enough to damage it
• Lorincz shot Owens two minutes after Owens began banging on her door
• Lorincz threw her gun back into the bedroom trash can where she kept it, but it somehow fell underneath a different gun she owned
• Lorincz bought that gun because of Owens and practiced shooting with some regularity
• Lorincz – despite a hysterical second 911 call after the shooting – was calm and unemotional as deputies detained her a few minutes after that call, inquiring about her cats but not the woman she shot
• Lorincz researched Florida’s Stand Your Ground law sometime around the shooting before she spoke to detectives

Read: Lorincz trial prosecutors work to overcome sluggish start

Additionally, prosecutors insinuated Lorincz walked up to her door before pulling the trigger and moved the shell casing from her shot onto the kitchen counter – a move the defense’s own witness called “highly unusual” as he attempted to downplay the possibility.

Prosecutors framed the shooting as a calculated move made by a frustrated Lorincz, who was seeking a quick way to end an ongoing dispute with her neighbor.

The jury was not allowed to hear any testimony about Lorincz using racial slurs against the kids, except for a recording of one of her interviews when detectives asked her about allegations neighbors made, and she denied them.

Read: All-white jury seated in Susan Lorincz trial in Marion County

The case for Lorincz

The defense comes into the final day of the trial with an advantage: they only need to convince one juror that Lorincz’s actions were reasonable instead of all six.

Their strategy has been centered on creating that sliver of doubt from the first moments they began arguing, with a dramatic opening statement involving pounding a fist on the podium and playing Lorincz’s 911 call where she cried to the point of being undecipherable.

Here are some of the other points they’ve made:

• Owens was decades younger than Lorincz and more than 100 pounds heavier
• Owens has had other altercations with Lorincz, including times when Lorincz said she was threatened
• Owens once tossed a sign at Lorincz
• Owens once followed Lorincz as she walked
• Lorincz had been in a car crash and had various medical problems that lowered her mobility
• Owens banged on Lorincz’s door hard enough to make the door and walls shake
• Owens was blocking Lorincz’s only way out of her apartment
• Owens was very angry and cursing
• Lorincz said she believed Owens was going to beat her to death
• Lorincz had no way of knowing if Owens was armed
• Lorincz said she was aiming to scare Owens, not kill her
• Lorincz’s shell casing was found on the kitchen counter, far from the door
• Lorincz didn’t delete anything from her phone
• Lorincz cooperated with deputies from the moment they arrived and willingly granted interviews with detectives
• Owens had been warned to call law enforcement instead of confronting Lorincz herself

The defense was barred from most mentions of drug use and shootings the neighborhood had in the past. Detectives said they were called there frequently, but the judge ruled going into detail about the state of crime in the neighborhood would be prejudicial.

A defense expert also wasn’t allowed to testify about Lorincz’s state of mind as Owens banged on her door since he lacked the proper qualifications.

Ultimately, the defense is asking jurors to take Lorincz at her word that she was afraid of what Owens might do to her before deputies could arrive on the scene. That fear caused her to pull the trigger to prevent Owens from entering her apartment.

Other than one juror nodding her head as a defense expert testified, there have been no visible signs of agreement with either side’s arguments during the court of the trial so far, and it’s unclear how quickly the six men and women will come to a decision – if ever.

Closing statements are scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. Friday.

Click here to download our free news, weather and smart TV apps. And click here to stream Channel 9 Eyewitness News live.