FORT PIERCE, Fla. — The courtroom drama surrounding Ryan Routh, accused of attempting to assassinate former President Donald Trump, reached a critical juncture on Monday as Routh rested his defense after a brief and tumultuous presentation. The federal trial, unfolding in Florida, has gripped the nation with its extraordinary circumstances: a defendant representing himself, a former president as the alleged target, and a series of courtroom clashes that have left observers riveted and, at times, bewildered.
Routh, who stands accused of plotting to kill Trump on September 15, 2024, at Trump’s West Palm Beach golf course, chose to act as his own attorney—a rare and risky move in a case of this magnitude. According to NPR and The Associated Press, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon had previously ruled him competent to do so, despite his lack of legal training or experience. Over the course of Monday’s proceedings, Routh called three witnesses: a firearms expert and two character witnesses, all in an effort to convince the jury that he was neither capable of nor intent on carrying out such a violent act.
The prosecution, meanwhile, had already spent a full week laying out its case, calling nearly 40 witnesses—including Secret Service agents, law enforcement officials, and forensic experts—who described in painstaking detail what they argued was a meticulously planned assassination attempt. According to ABC News, the government’s evidence included testimony that Routh was spotted by a Secret Service agent in the bushes with an assault rifle before Trump came into view. When the agent confronted him, Routh allegedly pointed his weapon, prompting the agent to fire and miss. Routh then fled the scene, only to be captured shortly afterward with the help of eyewitnesses.
Prosecutors also presented forensic evidence tying Routh to the Chinese-made AK-47 variant found abandoned at the scene, as well as a box containing wires, pipes, bullets, and a 12-page letter that two of Routh’s former coworkers received from him months earlier. The letter, prosecutors argued, amounted to a confession and even offered $150,000 to anyone who could "finish the job." Routh, for his part, has pleaded not guilty to all five federal counts, including attempting to kill a major presidential candidate, assaulting a federal officer, and firearms violations. He also faces state charges of terrorism and attempted murder.
When it was Routh’s turn to present his defense, the atmosphere in the courtroom quickly turned chaotic. Judge Cannon repeatedly interrupted Routh’s questioning, warning him to keep his arguments and lines of inquiry tied to the evidence and within the bounds of federal judicial procedure. At one point, she cautioned, “Any argument you make ... must be reasonably tied to the admitted evidence. Do you understand?” to which Routh replied, “Yes, Your Honor.” But as the day wore on, Cannon was forced to step in multiple times, ultimately warning that she would bar Routh from addressing the jury if his closing argument strayed too far from the case’s facts.
Routh’s first witness was Michael McClay, a Marine Corps veteran and sniper tactics expert. Routh attempted to focus on the technical difficulties of the alleged assassination attempt, highlighting that the rifle in question would routinely misfire and that the shot from Routh’s supposed sniper’s perch would have been extremely difficult. McClay testified that the gun, an SKS-style rifle, malfunctioned when he test-fired it months after Routh’s arrest. “The second round in the magazine repeatedly jammed,” McClay said, as reported by NPR. Prosecutors countered that the malfunction could have been caused by the acid used by the FBI to recover the gun’s obliterated serial numbers, not by any inherent flaw in the weapon.
Routh pressed McClay to estimate the likelihood of a successful shot from his alleged position, but McClay declined, stating, “With the severity and seriousness of this, I am not going to guess that.” Routh also tried to elicit testimony suggesting that only a “special type of person” could take another’s life, but Judge Cannon swiftly cut him off, deeming the question improper.
The defense then shifted to character witnesses. Marshall Hinshaw, a longtime friend and coworker, described Routh as “peaceful and gentle, and nonviolent.” When asked by Routh, “Is it your personal opinion of me that I am peaceful and gentle, and nonviolent?” Hinshaw responded, “I would say so. I would not expect you to harm anyone, Ryan.” Hinshaw also testified about Routh’s parenting, community involvement, and reputation for patience under stress. Despite the prosecutor’s attempts to challenge Hinshaw’s credibility by referencing his own criminal record, Hinshaw stood by his assessment of Routh’s character.
Atwell Milsun, a friend of Routh’s son, echoed these sentiments, stating, “I have never seen you as a violent person. Under stress, you have always been a jolly person.” Both witnesses testified about Routh’s history of helping others, lending money, and participating in community projects, all in an effort to paint a portrait of a man incapable of violence—let alone presidential assassination.
Yet these character witnesses came with risks. Prosecutor John Shipley argued that by introducing testimony about Routh’s nonviolence, the door was opened to discussing Routh’s alleged prior bad acts, including calls to kill politicians and neighbors, racially offensive statements, and threats to "shoot first" if confronted by law enforcement. Shipley maintained, “If the defendant is going to try to develop he is nonviolent, that information is relevant.”
Throughout the trial, Routh’s defense strategy appeared unorthodox, at times bordering on the theatrical. He declined to testify in his own defense, and many of his proposed witnesses—including an ex-girlfriend and several Palestinian scholars—were barred by Judge Cannon as irrelevant or prejudicial. Routh also argued that the area where he was found was public and that the gun was never fired. “They maybe proved that someone was outside the fence with a gun, but the gun was never fired,” he told the court. However, Judge Cannon ruled that the prosecution had presented enough evidence for the case to go to the jury.
Routh’s prior criminal history also came under scrutiny. As reported by The Associated Press, he had been arrested in 2002 after fleeing a traffic stop and barricading himself with a machine gun and an explosive device, and again in 2010 when police found more than 100 stolen items in a warehouse he owned. Both incidents resulted in probation or suspended sentences.
The alleged assassination attempt against Trump occurred just nine weeks after another attempt on Trump’s life in Butler, Pennsylvania—a stark reminder of the heightened security and tension surrounding the former president during the campaign season.
As closing arguments were scheduled for Tuesday, the fate of Ryan Routh now rests with the jury. The case, marked by its high stakes and unpredictable courtroom moments, has underscored the challenges of self-representation in a federal trial and the enduring political and personal risks facing public figures in America today.
