Jonathan Majors trial: Prosecution alleges emotional abuse, defense alleges revenge
The Jonathan Majors trial commenced in earnest as prosecution and defense offered differing accounts of the alleged domestic violence incident
Aux News Jonathan Majors
The trial of Jonathan Majors, concerning alleged domestic violence against his ex-girlfriend Grace Jabbari, commenced in earnest on Monday as both sides offered opening arguments. Statements from the prosecution and defense highlighted the typically he-said, she-said nature of high-profile domestic violence cases we’ve seen in the past. The case centers around the events of a car ride on March 25, in which Jabbari suspected Majors of infidelity after seeing a text message on his screen and went to grab his phone. The incident, of course, was characterized very differently by the prosecution and defense.
Before getting to March 25, the prosecution emphasized that Majors engaged in a pattern of emotional abuse in the couple’s two-year relationship. “He began to snap at, manipulate and strategically withhold affection from [Jabbari],” going as far as threatening suicide to “control her actions,” Assistant District Attorney Michael Perez alleged (per Variety). In one example, which occurred in September 2022, Jabbari brought a friend back to their shared apartment after going out for drinks, which caused Majors to become angry and aggressive. Later, Jabbari reportedly took a recording of Majors ranting that she “needs to live up to standards of Coretta Scott King and Michelle Obama” and saying “I am a great man” (via The Hollywood Reporter). Perez argued that this pattern in their relationship affected the incident on March 25; meanwhile, Majors’ lawyer Priya Chaudhry argued that their prior relationship history had “nothing to do with what happened in the car” (per Variety).
Perez told jurors that when Jabbari reached for Majors’ phone on March 25, he reacted in violence: “He intended to cause Grace Jabbari physical injury and, in fact, he did cause her physical injury.” Chaudhry has long maintained that Jabbari was the aggressor of the incident, and asserted to the jury that she assaulted Majors and tore his jacket “with her bare hands.” The prosecution argues that when Jabbari tried to leave the car, Majors threw her back in “like a football”; the defense says he “scooped her up and put her back in the car” out of concern for her safety (via THR). When the couple did part ways that night, Jabbari met three strangers who invited her to a club. Perez says she agreed to go in order to “block out the experience,” while Chaudhry says she left the car uninjured and spent the night “talking, texting, drinking, dancing, partying.”
Majors went to a hotel room, where he reportedly texted Jabbari that their relationship was over. Jabbari eventually returned to their shared apartment, attempted to call Majors multiple times, and then took two sleeping pills. Majors returned in the morning, allegedly found Jabbari laying on the floor in a closet, and called 911. When police arrived and questioned her about her injuries, Perez claims she was hesitant to tell them about the altercation in the car with Majors because the actor had “manipulated her and trained her to stay silent.” Chaudhry claims that Jabbari was “confused and nearly unintelligible” when questioned and repeatedly said she didn’t know where she got the injuries before agreeing with the police that Majors had caused them.
“Mr. Majors’ lifetime of hard work was coming to fruition and his career seemed unstoppable until […] he ended his relationship with Jabbari and she made these false allegations. … [This is] a man who spent 30 years working hard to get to where he was on March 25. A man with the world at his fingertips,” Chaudhry said of her client (per Variety). Professing him to be “a father, a poet, a devoted, practicing Christian and an actor,” Chaudhry said that Jabbari made false allegations “in revenge” as a way “to ruin Jonathan Majors and to take away everything he had spent his whole life working for” (via THR).
“This is a case about the end of a relationship, not about a crime—at least not one that Mr. Majors committed. This man is innocent,” Chaudhry claimed (via Deadline). Majors faces charges of assault (multiple counts of which were consolidated into one count on Monday, as agreed upon by both sides) and aggravated harassment. If convicted, he could face up to a year in prison.
35 Comments
I think the facts we know permit a plausible argument that Jabbari was the aggressor and at fault here. We don’t know who first made physical contact here. But you aren’t allowed to make unwanted physical contact with a person to take their phone, and that’s true even if the person is obviously physically stronger than you. And once you’ve assaulted someone, you’ve taken on a risk, to some degree, that they will hurt you.But it feels like Majors’ claim that he was pushing Jabbari back into the car to protect her just isn’t plausible, and sort of renders his story as a whole less credible. It’s like saying, “I wanted her to get away with me because she was delaying my daily visit to bring kittens to orphans.” Even if we’re willing to believe him, it’s clear that he’s at some point acting in anger, not some kind of charitable gesture of care for her. And admitting that wouldn’t really harm his defense — you’re allowed to be angry at someone who assaulted you.
That’s pretty much my take on the situation. I don’t believe he was trying to protect her, and find it plausible she was angry and tried to take his phone. My guess is there’s enough doubt around the situation that this ends with a not guilty verdict.
Ignorant fuck or publicist, who can tell? Oh. Right. Everyone can tell. And has been telling.
Judging from that header image, he’s one tax evasion away from turning into Wesley Snipes.
This article is way different than the articles The Root has been running on this story. The Root says Majors is innocent because women be lying.
Surprised to hear they’re still posting new content.
The writing staff of The Root knows you can always find working defending rich rapists and smearing victims.
I’m surprised that the Willem Dafoe-using alt is still so sad about not being able to tell the world his feelings about Black people.
I won against The Root. Those apes turned off comments. I can’t wait until Trump wins. I hope you are murdered by the government you dumb tard.
Is there a Root article you’re referring to in particular? Because I looked at the article below — which covers the opening statements, just like the AV Club article— and I can’t say I discern a particular pro-Majors bias:https://www.theroot.com/opening-statements-in-jonathan-majors-trial-paint-two-d-1851071978
Their latest piece on the trial is actually very skeptical of Majors. I haven’t been following the site closely, admittedly, but the past few articles I’ve seen there about this matter have been really straightforward and not just assuming this is another case of a white woman lying to get a black man in legal trouble. Maybe whoever wrote those pieces in the spring has moved on, or maybe they’ve had a change of heart after seeing more information.
That’s great they are acting like journalists after publishing something like 15 articles that were just reposts of the emails Majors lawyers sent to them smearing the victim. Pretty evil how those racists will stick up for an abuser because he is black.
Who cares?
Emotional abuse is not a crime lol.
Yes it is lol
Still, at least he’s committed to making that one face in every photo
Looking forward to the courtroom sketch artist’s rendition.
He looks like he’s cosplaying that time Indiana Jones pretended to be a French artist who wanted to look at the tapestries to fool some Nazis.
Scottish artist.
Then I am Mickey Mouse!
Doh you are right. Been a long time since I watched Last Crusade.
Scottish Lord, innit?
Didn’t see the need to twice correct them.
I just hope he remembered to bring his dumb little ceramic coffee cup.
Hopefully it’s hidden underneath that fucking ludicrous beret.
[This is] a man who spent 30 years working hard to get to where he was on March 25. A man with the world at his fingertips
A man in that situation might find themselves willing to lie and obfuscate in order to not face the consequences for his actions.In general, I find the whole “women are willing to lie to take everything away from a man” line to be extremely underwhelming. But surely it makes more sense to do it to someone who is already well into their success, rather than someone who’s merely on the cusp of it. It’s not like Marvel is going to make Jabbari Kang now. What’s the point of taking everything if you don’t get those Disney Bucks? It would have made more sense to wait three years before pulling the con.
It sounds like it’s undisputed that Majors texted Jabbari the night of the incident, breaking up with her. So (and I’m just addressing your post here, not saying this is what she did or was thinking) she didn’t have three years to stay with Majors until he was more successful. Her relationship was over that night.I doubt Majors is going to say this is some kind of longterm scheme Jabbari had been planning to spring at some point. I think he’ll say Jabbari attacked him out of jealousy that he was talking to other women and she was injured in the process. He’ll say that Jabbari, angry and despondent after Majors then broke up with her, made up a story to take revenge on Majors.
JFC what the hell is he wearing. Nice court attire on the girlfriend as well.
The Fashion Jury unanimously voted guilty
His hat’s a little weird, but other than that, isn’t he just wearing a suit, a scarf, and an overcoat? That’s the thing a man typically to court in December.
Take that fuckin 5 year-olds “artist” Halloween costume off before you defend yourself from DA accusations, you goobering dweebass
His outfit in that photo is hilarious.
Was it dress as an avengers villain to court day?
I could’ve sworn the defense attorney said there was video of the taxi cab incident. Wouldn’t that make this an open and shut case?
Depending on the angle and the video quality. Either it was mentioned in the opening remarks yesterday, in which case I’m surprised that mention wasn’t carried forward into this article; or it wasn’t mentioned, in which case I’m a bit surprised that they didn’t mention it and that the omission wasn’t remarked upon by the media. But they’ll get into the trial proper soon enough.