Woman Accused of Imposing ‘Death Penalty’ on Driver for Minor Traffic Infraction, Prosecutors Allege


Prosecutors claim the woman accused of killing a hit-and-run driver sentenced him to death over a traffic violation.

Following the trial, Channel 2’s Tom Jones has been in the Clayton County courtroom since last week.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys delivered closing arguments in Hannah Payne’s trial on Tuesday.

Payne’s attorney told the jury that she was attacked and terrified that day.

Kenneth Herring, 62, assaulted Payne, grabbed her gun, and shot himself in May 2019, according to defense counsel Matt Tucker.

Prosecutors claimed Payne shot Herring after he fled the scene of an accident.

And you don’t get the death penalty for committing a traffic infraction,” Assistant District Attorney Nigel Hunter explained to the jury.

Payne, according to Hunter, should have heeded 911’s repeated orders not to pursue Herring, who was minding his own business.

“Was chased down, detained, shot, and murdered by this defendant,” Hunter claimed in his statement.

Payne’s attorney claimed she was attempting to do a good act by obtaining Herring’s license plate number. Tucker claimed that when Payne got out of her Jeep to approach Herring near Riverdale Road and Forest Parkway, all she wanted to do was advise him to go back to the place of the first altercation.

Instead, he stated Herring began striking her and dragging her through the glass of his truck.

He’s grabbing, pulling her, and she says, ‘I got a gun, and I’m going to shoot you,‘” Tucker explained to the jury.

Tucker claimed Herring battled for Payne’s gun and then shot himself.

That trigger went off while this young lady was scared,” he went on to say.

Prosecutors have stated that this is not the case.

According to multiple witnesses, Payne was the aggressor, striking and fighting him.

And when she pulled the firearm, she pointed the firearm in his direction and what they recall is she immediately shot,” Hunter went on to say.

According to Payne’s counsel, the eyewitnesses were either biased or did not see what they claimed they saw. The prosecution claimed that their testimony was consistent.

The jury was given the case at about 4:30 p.m. and instructed to begin deliberating as soon as they received the indictment. The judge did not specify how long she expected them to deliberate before adjourning.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.