McIver Jury Asks if It Can Acquit on Murder & Assault Charges, but Convict for Influencing Witness
Fulton County Chief Judge Robert McBurney, at the urging of defense attorneys, said yes to the jury question.
April 18, 2018 at 05:29 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Daily Report
The jury deliberating the murder case against Atlanta attorney Claud “Tex” McIver on Wednesday asked whether they can find McIver guilty of influencing a witness, even if they acquitted him of all other charges.
“If not guilty on Counts 1-4, can McIver be found guilty of Count 5?” the jury asked.
Counts one through four include malice murder with a lesser included offense of felony involuntary manslaughter resulting from reckless conduct, felony murder, aggravated assault and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.
Count five is the charge of influencing a witness. That charge accuses McIver of attempting to influence Dani Jo Carter—who was driving the couple's Ford Expedition when McIver shot his wife. Carter is the sole witness to the shooting.
McIver is accused of attempting to influence Carter to mislead police, if questioned, by saying she was at the hospital as “a friend of the family.”
Urged by defense attorney Don Samuel to answer the jury's question with a resounding “Yes,” Fulton County Superior Court Chief Judge Robert McBurney agreed and said, “Yes. The defendant can be found not guilty of some, all or none of the counts of the indictment. “
“The question was a very simple yes or no question,” Samuel argued when McBurney initially said he intended to repeat what he said during the jury charge—that the defendant could be found not guilty of some, all or none of the alleged crimes. “The answer is yes.”
And, prompted by his co-counsel Bruce Harvey, Samuel added, “With an exclamation point.”
The jury also asked the judge if they could be allowed to get back in the Ford Expedition where McIver fatally shot his wife, Diane, on Sept. 25, 2016, this time with the Smith & Wesson .38-caliber revolver he had on his lap.
McIver has always insisted the shooting was an accident, while prosecutors claim he had a financial motive.
On Monday, the jurors were taken to the SUV and were allowed to sit in the back passenger seat where Tex McIver was sitting when he fired the fatal shot. At that time, they could view a rod demonstrating the bullet trajectory through the seat Diane McIver was sitting in. But they were not given an opportunity to hold the gun.
The jury has that gun and has been allowed to hold it and pull the trigger.
The jury also asked for copies of emails that were introduced as evidence. Those emails featured exchanges between McIver and his wife—some over a dispute involving rewrites of their wills, especially hers, as well as McIver's growing financial difficulties.
McBurney replied to the jury's question about getting back in the SUV by saying, “Perhaps,” adding he would give the jury “a more definitive answer in the morning.”
In response to the third question, McBurney said that at least some of the emails in question will be made available Thursday.
The jury ended its first full day of deliberations at 5 p.m. Wednesday, but it had one final request. They asked to see McIver's interview with Atlanta police three days after he shot his wife. McBurney told the jury that they will be allowed to view the video Thursday morning.
The jury began deliberating about 4 p.m. Tuesday but adjourned after an hour following five hours of closing arguments and the jury charge.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThese Law Firm Leaders Are Optimistic About 2025, Citing Deal Pipeline, International Business
6 minute readWachtell Helps Miami Dolphins Secure One of NFL’s First Private Equity Deals
3 minute readGrayRobinson Opens Office in Pensacola, Marking First New Office Since 2019
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Considering the Implications of the 2024 Presidential Election for Jurors in White Collar Cases
- 22024 in Review: Judges Met Out Punishments for Ex-Apple, FDIC, Moody's Legal Leaders
- 3What We Heard From Litigation Leaders in 2024
- 4Akin and Simpson Create New Practice Groups With Integrated Teams
- 5Thursday Newspaper
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250