A judge in Brunswick, Georgia, has ended the trial of former District Attorney Jackie Johnson, who was accused of using her influence to protect the men involved in the killing of Ahmaud Arbery. The judge threw out the felony indictment against Johnson, abruptly halting the case before it went to the jury.
Johnson, who served as the top state prosecutor in Glynn County at the time of Arbery's death, has consistently denied influencing the initial decision not to arrest the men responsible for shooting Arbery nearly five years ago. The judge's ruling effectively cleared Johnson of the criminal charges that had been looming over her for more than three years.
The charges against Johnson included violating her oath of office, a felony, and obstructing police, a misdemeanor. The trial, which lasted a week, concluded in Johnson's favor without a verdict from the jury, which had heard testimony from witnesses, including Johnson herself.
The judge dismissed the oath violation charge after Johnson's attorneys argued that the 2021 indictment was flawed by technical errors and did not accuse her of any crimes. The misdemeanor obstruction charge was also dropped after the judge ruled that prosecutors had failed to provide evidence that Johnson had directed police investigators not to arrest the shooter.
Arbery's parents expressed disappointment with the judge's decision, believing that Johnson had played a role in protecting their son's killers. The incident occurred when Greg and Travis McMichael, along with a neighbor, chased and fatally shot Arbery while he was running in their neighborhood. The men were later charged and convicted of murder and hate crimes in separate trials.
The investigation into Johnson was initiated by Georgia Attorney Chris Carr, who accused her of withholding information related to the case. Johnson, who denied any wrongdoing, was voted out of office in 2020 following the controversy surrounding Arbery's killing.
Prosecutors faced challenges in building a case against Johnson, with witnesses testifying that they did not see any illegal actions on her part. Johnson's defense argued that the indictment did not specify any criminal actions on her part.
In a statement, Carr expressed regret that the jury would not get to decide on the case. Johnson's defense attorneys successfully argued for the dismissal of the indictment, citing technical errors and lack of evidence to support the charges.
