Home > Our Blog > Jeffrey Conroy Trial: Understanding the Charges

Blog Post

Jeffrey Conroy Trial: Understanding the Charges

Posted April 14, 2010 by Ted Hesson
Categories: Hate Watch

After closing statements by the defense and the prosecution earlier this week, the jury began deliberating this morning in the trial of Jeffrey Conroy, the Medford teen accused of stabbing and killing Ecuadorian immigrant Marcelo Lucero in a November 2008 hate attack.

At present, newspaper and television reporters are camped out at the courthouse awaiting a verdict, which could take hours, days, or weeks. In addition, a hung jury is always a possibility.

As you know, the jurors have had weeks to absorb the evidence and testimony in the case. So shouldn’t they know if Conroy is guilty or not?

Not necessarily.

For argument’s sake, let’s imagine that all 12 jurors believe that Conroy is guilty of something.

This line of thinking isn’t such a stretch. On Monday, Conroy’s defense attorney, William Keahon, spent a good portion of his three-hour summation trying to convince jurors to consider a lesser manslaughter charge for his client, in the event that they find Conroy guilty. (For the record, “arguing in the alternative,” as the law school kids call it, is common practice for defense lawyers.)

The sticky part is that jurors will need to agree as to exactly which charges have been proved “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

The six highest charges against Conroy, which are perhaps the most contentious, are related to allegedly stabbing Lucero.

Here are those charges, courtesy of Newsday:

—Second-degree murder as a hate crime
—Second-degree murder
—First-degree manslaughter as a hate crime
—First-degree manslaughter
—Second-degree manslaughter as a hate crime
—Second-degree manslaughter

Determining which of these charges are supported by the evidence will likely take some time. A few days ago, a lawyer at the trial explained the difference between the murder and manslaughter charges to me in layman’s terms.

According to her, the main difference is intent.

If Conroy did stab Lucero, did he intend to kill him? If so, the act would qualify as second-degree murder (In New York State, first-degree murder is reserved for police officers and other government officials).

Did Conroy intend to do serious bodily harm to Lucero, who died from the stab wound? That would be first-degree manslaughter.

Or did Conroy simply act recklessly in stabbing Lucero, without intent to do serious bodily harm? In that case, the charge would be second-degree manslaughter.

The jury can also find Conroy guilty of any of these charges as a hate crime. If the jury finds that Conroy selected his alleged victim based on the fact that he was Hispanic, the act qualifies as a hate crime. For the full New York State hate crimes statute, click here.

I should issue a disclaimer here: I’m oversimplifying the differentiation between each of these laws and the hate crime criteria, but this gives you some insight into the possible discussions among jurors today.

In addition to the charges related to the alleged stabbing, Conroy also faces gang assault and attempted assault charges related to alleged attacks on Hector Sierra and Angel Loja.

Tags : hate crimes, jeffrey conroy, marcelo lucero, suffolk

Permalink Comments