Hemy Neuman was convicted of murder Thursday for shooting a man outside of a Georgia day care center and received the punishment of life in prison without parole, according to CNN.
The sentence was delivered less than 2 hours after a jury consisting of 9 women and 3 men found Neuman guilty of murder with malice "beyond a reasonable doubt, but mentally ill."
"This situation was brought about by your hands," DeKalb County Judge Gregory Adams said, adding that the act "appeared to be a planned execution."
In November 2010, Neuman shot Russell "Rusty" Sneiderman numerous times in the parking lot of Dunwoody Prep after dropping off his son, then-2-years-old.
The police described the shooting as a "cold and calculated murder."
The jury instructions left them with 3 options:
(1) Find Neuman guilty of murder,
(2)Find him guilty but mentally ill, or
(3) Find him not guilty by reason of insanity, as he'd pleaded.
As mentioned before, the jury chose the middle ground as they selected option number 2. That gave the judge the option of sentencing Neuman to either life with a possibility of parole in 30 years or life w/out parole. The judge chose the latter.
In addition to Neuman's defense that he was mentally ill, part of the defense's theory in the case was that the victim's wife "preyed upon [Neuman] and used him to commit the crime that she is responsible for," said defense attorney Doug Peters Thursday.
Further, Peters added that he did not believe that Andrea Sneiderman knew the specifics of the shooting plan even as he suggested that she inspired it.
She was never charged in connection to this case. Yet, Dekalb County D.A. Robert James said that "it is something that we have under review right now."
"Justice has been served here," James told reporters, shifting the focus from the widow to the victim. "I want to thank God that finally, after a year and a half or more, this family -- a good family -- is able to begin the process of healing."
At the time of the shooting, Neuman was Andrea Sneiderman's supervisor at work and both sides alleged that the 2 had an affair. Yet, she denied the accusation during her testimony during trial.
Moreover, witness testimony at trial demonstrated all the signs of premeditated murder including Neuman's use of a disguise as he staked out the victim and his later concealment of the murder plan and all of the evidence.
However, the defense never yielded from their insanity claims.
"He's insane, he sees angels, he sees demons, he's crazy. 'Something's wrong with me,'" James said, repeating assertions made by Neuman and his defense team. "If you cannot trust the ingredients on this insanity sandwich, then I'm going to ask you -- don't eat it."
Peters said that he and other defense team members plan to talk soon with Neuman, to discuss what their next step will be. Nevertheless, he hinted that an appeal will be the most likely avenue that they will pursue.
"We still do believe that a jury should return a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity," said Peters. "We didn't get that this time, but we're not about giving up."
Andrea Sneiderman's attorney released a statement Thursday saying that her client "is grateful for and relieved by the jury's guilty verdict and sentence."
Although, this case is over for now there are 2 issues that remain pending. First whether the widow will be prosecuted as an accomplice to her former husband's murder. And second, whether Neuman may be exonerated through a successful insanity defense on appeal.
What do you think?
Bankruptcy – Business
Bankruptcy – Personal
Criminal Law – Appellate
Criminal Law – Federal
Criminal Law – State Felony & Misdemeanor
Drunk Driving Defense
Dumb or Weird Laws
GM Ignition Switch
Stryker Hip Replacement
Intellectual Property Law
Labor & Employment Law
Landlord Tenant Law
Personal Injury – Defendant
Personal Injury – Plaintiff
Social Security Disability
Weird Law Friday
Trending Searches#TBT #ThrowbackThursday constitutional law Criminal Law - State Felony & Misdemeanor dangerous or defective products divorce DUI dumb laws estate planning Events that Changed History Family Law FAQ first-amendment product-recall products liability random laws recall safety recall strange laws weird laws