Robinson Murder Trial Goes To Jury

Wayne Harvey

Updated 2 years ago

The sixth day in the trial of Peter Robinson of Bradford brought the closing arguments and the case was delivered to the jury.They didn’t get the case until after 5pm, and they deliberated behind closed doors for more than two hours before calling a recess for the night.Monday was the day after Robinson’s 50th birthday, and he’s on trial facing murder charges related to the 2011 death of David Trask of Hudson.The day began with the defense calling their final witnesses.Then the State called just one rebuttal witness and both sides rested their case.In the afternoon the council for both sides made their closing arguments, each one lasting more than an hour, and each attorney reinforced the case they’ve made the jury during the rest of the trial.The prosecution says it is a clear cut case of murder, while the defense maintains it was an act of self defense.”Ladies and gentlemen no matter how you slice this case up it’s obviously murder, it’s the trifecta of murders it is intentional murder, it is knowing murder, and at the same time it is depraved indifference murder,” said the Assistant Attorney General Andrew Benson.While defense attorney Thomas Hallett countered by saying “The truth is what Peter Robinson has told you, and that nothing the State has done, nothing team Trask has done, can change the fact that they can not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was not self defense”As part of the closing arguments Hallett also said to the jury “Pete had the right to act the way he did, and he had the right to take another man’s life, because that man threatened to take his life, and that man threatened to take his life again, and that man made actions to take his life a third and fourth time, and Pete had no option.”Benson argued there were other options, “When you use deadly force you can only use deadly force under our law in self defense, when you reasonably believe the person against whom you are about to use deadly force is about to use deadly force against you and when you reasonably believe that your use of deadly force is necessary, necessary to defend yourself, you can’t kill a man for goading, you can’t kill in a feud.”The jury had the case for a little more than two hours before they went home for the night, they will resume deliberations Tuesday morning at 8:30.


MENU