Buffalo, New York — Attorneys representing Payton Gendron, the man accused of fatally shooting 10 Black individuals in a racist attack at a local supermarket, asked a federal judge on Thursday to dismiss the charges against him. The defense claims the grand jury that indicted Gendron lacked sufficient representation of Black and other minority groups, thus violating his constitutional right to a jury drawn from a diverse cross-section of the community.
Gendron did not attend the hearing before U.S. District Judge Lawrence Vilardo, who acknowledged the defense’s argument in a case steeped in racial violence. The judge remarked that Gendron’s concern regarding the predominance of white jurors was “a little incongruous” given the nature of the hate crimes involved. Following the arguments, Vilardo did not deliver an immediate ruling on the defense’s motion.
If convicted in the 2022 massacre at the Tops supermarket, Gendron could face the death penalty. The attack specifically targeted a Black neighborhood, and the victims ranged in age from 32 to 86. In addition to the fatalities, three others suffered injuries. Gendron is currently serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole after pleading guilty to multiple state charges, including murder, in November 2022.
During this emotionally charged hearing, a man attempted to confront Gendron and had to be restrained by law enforcement. A trial concerning the federal hate crime and firearm charges is expected to commence next year, with the U.S. Justice Department indicating plans to pursue capital punishment if Gendron is found guilty.
John Elmore, an attorney representing some victims’ families in civil lawsuits against Gendron, commented that the defense’s strategy appears to focus on delaying or averting the death penalty. He noted that challenges regarding the composition of juries seldom succeed, even when minority representation is lacking.
Gendron’s legal team argued that there exists a systemic underrepresentation of Black and Hispanic individuals in the jury selection processes in Buffalo. According to their filings, the grand jury that indicted Gendron consisted of approximately one-third of the expected number of Black and Hispanic potential jurors. They expressed concern over the methodology used by the source that compiled the jury lists, emphasizing that there was no transparency regarding the selection process.
Judge Vilardo highlighted that adding just two more Black jurors to the panel of 60 could have led to a more representative jury. “Could this be an accident rather than a systemic flaw?” he questioned during the hearing.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Caitlin Higgins opposed the motion, labeling the issue a minor procedural concern rather than justifying a dismissal of the indictment. She asserted that federal regulations on jury selection do not demand perfect representation.
Zoghlin, an Assistant Public Defender, argued for broader implications beyond Gendron’s case, stating that various marginalized groups continue to face exclusion in jury pools—a reality that cannot be ignored.
The U.S. Attorney’s office responded that Gendron failed to demonstrate any systematic underrepresentation that contradicted the jury selection plan. They maintained that any discrepancies in racial representation fell within acceptable limits and were not the result of the selection process itself.
In previous filings, Gendron’s attorneys contended that he should be exempt from the death penalty based on his young age at the time of the crime, asserting that brain development is still occurring at 18. This particular motion remains pending.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the case continues to raise critical questions about racial equity in the judicial system.