Two men sentenced to life in prison for the killing of Ahmaud Arbery have been given another life sentence for committing a federal hate crime. Another man, who took a video of the killing, was sentenced to 35 years in prison. Dr. Tracy Pearson, a legal and cultural analyst, breaks down the implications of these rulings, and what they could mean for future hate crimes cases. 

Cheddar's News Wrap

Three Men Sentenced Again for Killing of Ahmaud Arbery

two men sentenced to life in prison for the killing of Ahmad are very have been given another life sentence for committing a federal hate crime? Travis McMichael and his father. Greg McMichael were told they must serve their time in state prison instead of federal prison, which their lawyers tried in vain to argue for. Their neighbor William Roddy Bryan, who took a video of the killing, was sentenced to 35 years in prison. Here to discuss the legal implications of these decisions is Dr. Tracy Pearson, she's a legal and cultural analyst. Tracy. Thanks so much for joining us. Now, are these rulings just symbolic given that the two men are already serving a life sentence. Thank you for having me. It's great to be here. No, these aren't symbolic sentences at all. If the underlying state sentences are in any way disturbed, this federal sentence will kick in. In fact, it is in play already because the sentences were issued, The life sentences anyway, were ordered to be concurrent with the actual sentences from the state uh sentence that the state judge gave out in state court. Now, how might these rulings set legal precedent for future hate kind crisis? Well, what we've done here is established, what's acceptable in society and what isn't acceptable in society. These aren't going to produce epiphanies. But what it is doing is holding law enforcement and others accountable as you know, Brianna Taylor in her case. There is a some indictments came down this week. So we are holding folks accountable for the racial animus that leads to the deaths of others. Now speaking of those, um, experts say federal hate crime convictions acknowledge the fact that these, there's racial motivations behind these attacks. Why are these sentences in particular? Significant? These sentences in particular are significant because they, they are life sentences. They are carrying a huge weight. There is no parole associated with federal sentences. Uh, and this sentence in particular here is going to be served mostly in in Georgia state prison because the federal prison doesn't have the ability to hold them because the first conviction is the one that controls. So here the Georgia conviction would control and this is where they'll be serving their sentences. I'm glad you brought that up because in this case, the defendants had asked to serve in federal prison, not in state prison over safety concerns. So why did the judge rule against this request? And what is the significance of that? That's a really great question. Uh, the reason why the judge ruled that way was because there was a longstanding policy that codified in law and in regulation that prohibits the federal government from taking a prisoner from ST uh custody, uh, to have them serve their sentence first unless they are the primary uh, custodian of that prisoner. So here, the Georgia was the primary custodian of these prisoners. And so therefore they'll serve their sentence there. And the significance of that here is that the Georgia prison system has come under fire recently. The Department of Justice is in fact investigating the Georgia prison system for the conditions under which prisoners serve their sentences. So speaking of another case, the Justice Department recently decided to try in federal court. The four men who are accused of killing breonna taylor. And this is a case that we didn't really see justice in the state Kentucky where she was, where this case happened. What is the significance of actually having this herd in a federal case and you think this is going to bring some sort of closure for the people involved? Well, I don't think you ever get closure when you've lost a loved one, but in this situation we have charges, indictments that have been handed down for law enforcement inappropriately using force and also engaging in alleged lying on a search warrant. Our justice system implodes if people don't tell the truth. And so at least here we're holding, it appears law enforcement accountable for the alleged crime of lying to a court on a search warrant application. Now, do you think the Justice Department will continue to step in in these cases, especially where a lot of people feel that justice hasn't been served at the state and local levels? I think that in this situation in this administration, they have placed hate crimes at a priority. You know, you're never going to have an epiphany in these cases these cases, we hope that they will send a message. We hope that they will stop this behavior. But the reality is is that you take on one racist at a time. And so here the Department of Justice is moving forward to deal with these issues. And this administration at least is making it a priority. And is there anything else that can be done to ensure that people who commit these crimes and the law enforcement officers that are involved in these crimes can be held accountable. The reason why these crimes were pursued was because of public outcry and public uh, advocacy. So what people can do is to continue to record these events where it's lawful to continue to report these issues to law enforcement and to make a public outcry using whatever means they have available. That's lawful. Well, that's thanks to dr Tracy Pearson. She's a legal and cultural analyst.