Jamar Pinckney Gets 2nd Degree Conviction in Murder of Teenage Son

Jamar Pinckney Sr. doesn't deny that he killed his 15 year old son -- shooting him in the head as he knelt in a vacant lot close to the house where he lived. To be decided by the jury was whether the killing constituted murder in the 1^st degree, 2^nd degree, or manslaughter. The defense attorney's manslaughter defense relied upon the defendant's allegation that he was so outraged by his son's behavior that he lost control. Jamar Pinckney, Sr. contends his 15 year old son raped his three-year old toddler.

The trial was featured on TruTV and it's "In Session" programming. Few cases could as well depict the conflict of emotions in courtroom drama. In the Detroit courtroom, prosecuting attorney Christine Kowal cross-examined defendant Jamar Pinkney Sr. with relentless specificity. In painstaking detail, reading from police documents, Kowal examined the defendant, making him describe the seconds leading to Jamal Jr.'s open air execution.

Defense attorneys took the unusual step of putting the defendant on the stand where he appeared as a stoic, intelligent witness on his own behalf.

Perhaps the defendant's detached demeanor would point the way to a long prison term. Perhaps the jurors expected a display of deep emotional remorse rather than the defendant's cool rationality. After all, Pinckney had admitted to the facts of the killing. That he seemed to feel that his actions were somehow justified angered some onlookers.

In court, prosecutor Kowal played off the fact that the killing of Pinckney's 15 year old son was methodical, if not pre-meditated. Oddly, the prosecutor made some distinction between the concept of "rape," the word used by Pinckney Sr. vs. "humping," the word taken from a witness statement and used by the prosecutor. None of the witnesses, except the defendant, would confirm Pinckney Sr.'s statement that his son told him he'd inserted his penis into the toddler.

On direct examination, Jamar Jr.'s mother said she heard her son say "he pulled down her pants, got on top of her, and humped on her." Many people would make no such distinctions in cases of child molestation, but some people found the prosecutor's subtle semantic argument convincing. Besides, Jamar Pinckney Jr. had already paid the price.

The implication was strong that there were other issues on Jamal Pinckney Sr.'s mind when he pulled the trigger on Jamal Jr. After all, Pinckney was divorced from Jamal Jr.'s mother, and had started a new family. Perhaps there were resentments underneath which had boiled to the surface. Through her intense questioning, Kowal managed to match Pinckney Sr.'s detachment and stoic personality with the disposition of cold blooded murderer.

Did you have the gun in your hand at that time? Did you think to call the police? Could you have changed your mind at that point? And did you order your son to strip naked? And did you hear your son beg for his life?

The barrage of short specific questions could not derail the defendant. In answer to Kowal's questions, Pinckney repeatedly answered: "I was not in control of myself."

The defense relied on the natural repugnance jurors would experience as they listened to an account of the teenager's molestation of the three-year-old. While rape had not been proven, Pinckney's allegation was partially supported by a medical report showing lacerations in the vaginal area of the toddler.

Pinckney answered prosecutor Kowal's question with his head cocked slightly to the side, his chin raised. His mien appeared resolute but may have been interpreted by onlookers and the jury as defiant. Did he truly believe he had acted righteously?

The portrait of an out-of-control father of a three year old girl child who has been sexually violated wasn't too much a reach for the jury, many of whom were visibly moved by court testimony. One juror wept; another winced as Jamar Sr. told the story about how he questioned his 15 year old son before killing him.

What wasn't clear was whether the jury's empathy leaned toward the defendant or toward the 15 year old victim. That issue became clear when the jury later reached a verdict. After deliberation, the jury found Pinckney guilty of Murder in the 2^nd Degree, which carried a sentence of from 37 to 80 years in prison.

After the trial was over, the jury foreperson told CNN that there had been an earlier 10-2 vote for conviction on 1^st degree murder. A compromise was later reached, she said, when the judge instructed the 10 woman and two man jury on the legal meaning of "intent."

Pinckney Sr. was a postal worker, and had never been in trouble with the law. He had a concealed weapons permit and sometimes carried a gun to protect himself in the tough Detroit neighborhoods where legal niceties are not always enjoyed, and street justice often prevails.

Comments on the CNN "In Session" blog are almost unanimous in their indignation and condemnation of Pinckney, Sr. Just a few empathized with the defendant. There is justice in the verdict, no doubt, but it wasn't the kind of justice which was "tempered with mercy." What Jamal Pinckney Sr. did was horrific, but his was such a human and ultimately tragic failing.