Jurors in Fort Pierce, Florida, are expected to begin deliberations Tuesday on the federal criminal charges brought against Ryan Routh, the man accused of attempting to assassinate then-presidential candidate Donald Trump at his golf course in Florida last year. The defense, represented by Routh himself, rested its case after just one day, with Routh calling only three witnesses and stating he would not take the stand to testify. Both the prosecution and defense formally rested their cases at 2:20 p.m., with the court reconvening for closing arguments scheduled for Tuesday at 9 a.m. The jury will be instructed to consider whether prosecutors met the standard for conviction on each of the five federal charges against Routh, which include attempted assassination, assaulting a federal officer, and multiple firearms offenses.
Routh, 59, has pleaded not guilty to all counts, and a verdict could be reached as early as Tuesday or Wednesday, pending the length of the closing arguments and the deliberation process. If convicted, Routh could face a maximum of life in prison. The case has been highly publicized, with the prosecution spending nearly two weeks presenting its case to the jury. During that time, jurors heard from 38 witnesses and reviewed hundreds of exhibits, including text messages, call logs, bank records, and cellphone data linking Routh to the alleged gun purchase and placing him near Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach in the weeks before the alleged attempted assassination.
Routh’s self-representation contrasts starkly with the prosecution’s well-organized case. His defense, which lasted just a few hours, did not introduce new evidence or call additional witnesses. The judge instructed the jury to consider whether the prosecution met the standard for each charge and cautioned against considering any personal biases. The closing arguments, which will be presented by both sides, will be followed immediately by jury deliberations. This high-profile trial has drawn significant public attention, particularly given the involvement of a former presidential candidate and the severity of the alleged crime. The potential life sentence on conviction underscores the gravity of the case and its implications for legal and public discourse on gun violence and political threats.