#Jonathan Majors Unlikely to Get Jail Time, Could Appeal on Use of Texts, Lawyers Say

While Jonathan Majors has been convicted of assault and harassment, members of the legal community believe the actor will get little to any jail time and may have grounds for an appeal — though the career consequences of doing so may outweigh the benefits. 

The actor was found guilty of reckless assault in the third degree, a misdemeanor, and of harassment in the second degree, which is a violation. The assault charge carries a maximum sentence of up to one year in jail, but several attorneys said they do not believe Majors will spend time behind bars. He is scheduled to be sentenced on Feb. 6. 

“Since it’s the defendant’s first conviction, although technically he faces one year of jail, the judge will 99 percent give him three years probation, anger management and possibly some community service. Mr. Majors is not getting jail time,” said Cary London, a Manhattan-based civil rights and criminal defense attorney at Shulman & Hill.

Still, other outside consequences have already begun to pile up for the actor. Shortly after the verdict was read, Marvel Studios dropped the actor as Kang the Conqueror from its upcoming Marvel Cinematic Universe films. Legal experts think Majors will likely appeal the conviction, pointing to missteps by his defense team and the charges themselves, in a case that has already had several unusual steps along the way. 

A misdemeanor case going to trial, particularly a domestic violence case in New York, is already “extremely rare,” London said. In many misdemeanor cases, a defendant pleads guilty to a lesser charge in order to avoid the possibility of a harsher sentence.

A spokesperson for the district attorney’s office said there were no offers put on record before the trial began. It is unclear if informal discussions about a plea deal took place, however. Loyola Law School Professor Stanley A. Goldman told The Hollywood Reporter he could think of dozens of examples of casual talks that never made it to the record during his time as a public defender.

The trial was also a chance for Majors to try to prove his innocence after an onslaught of press in the lead up and with Disney then hanging in the balance.  

“Unlike in most misdemeanor cases, Majors was likely guided by the public and media perception of the charges against him and hoped that a public trial rather than a plea deal would clear his name,” said criminal defense attorney Kate Mangels, a partner at the Los-Angeles based firm Kinsella Holley Iser Kump Steinsapir LLP.

“It is surprising that it went to trial, but explained by his celebrity,” said Mark Geragos, a criminal defense lawyer and managing partner of the Los-Angeles firm Geragos & Geragos. “This is a case that normally would have been resolved without much fanfare or consequence that instead took on a life of its own, as is often the case.”

The charges stem from an incident on March 25, when Majors was riding in a car with his then-girlfriend, Grace Jabbari. She testified that she saw a text on Majors’ phone that read: “Oh how I wish to be kissing you” and grabbed the phone from Majors, who then pried her finger from the phone, grabbed her arm and right hand, twisted her forearm and struck her head to get the phone away from her. She said he later threw her back into the car, which relates to the harassment violation.

He was found not guilty of intentional assault in the third degree and not guilty of aggravated harassment in second degree.

At the start of the trial, London said he believed Majors had the upper hand, given the fact that Jabbari testified that she did not immediately seek medical treatment after the incident (she went to the club with individuals she met on the street who helped her after the incident in the car) and the fact that the driver of the private car, a witness for the prosecution, said he believed Jabbari had been the aggressor (though he also said he had not seen the incident directly). But that trajectory changed at the end of the first week. 

“At the outset of the case, I thought this would end in an acquittal. However, once the defense attorney for Mr. Majors made a mistake, and opened the door to the Molineux ruling, I knew his fate was sealed,” London said. 

During the defense team’s cross-examination of Jabbari, they employed a line of questioning that Judge Michael Gaffey said “lacked specificity” and allowed the prosecution to bring in Molineux evidence, which is evidence of prior uncharged crimes, that he had previously been deemed inadmissible. 

That evidence consisted of text messages Majors sent to Jabbari in September 2022 in which he appeared to dissuade her from seeking medical care related to an incident that was not specified. 

“I fear you have no perspective of what could happen if you go to the hospital,” Majors wrote. “They will ask you questions and as I don’t think you actually protect us it could lead to an investigation even if you do lie and they suspect something.”

Jabbari texted that she would tell doctors she “bumped” her head, adding “Why would I tell them what really happened when it’s clear I want to be with you?””

Still, as noted by Mangels, the jury returned a split verdict, ultimately deciding not to convict on the more serious assault and harassment charges, which implies they “saw the situation as more nuanced than what the prosecutor presented.” In her view, photographs of Jabbari’s injuries and surveillance footage shown by the prosecution made it unsurprising that the jury found evidence of some kind of injury and harassment.

Several attorneys said they believe an appeal is likely based on the fact that this misstep from the defense team reversed the Molineux ruling protection and allowed this evidence to be introduced. Lance Fletcher, a criminal defense attorney in Manhattan and a former prosecutor, also pointed to the texts as an issue. “Obviously, this kind of thing can sound very bad to a jury and Majors may argue that the jury should not have heard about them, especially since they were not specifically discussing the assault he was on trial for,” Fletcher said. 

Another potential issue for appeal, according to London, is the fact that Judge Michael Gaffey submitted two counts of assault, with one intentional and one reckless, for jury deliberation. The jury found Majors guilty of reckless assault and acquitted him on the intentional charge.

In a statement through Chaudhry after the verdict, she implied that the actor would appeal, saying he “looks forward to fully clearing his name.” 

However, an appeal would not only cost more time and money, but would also bring more attention to details of the case, which have included allegations by Jabbari of his temper, as well as audio recordings of Majors telling her to act more like Michelle Obama and Coretta Scott King, that could prove more damaging to Majors’ reputation.

Said Goldman, “He probably has nothing to lose by appealing other than continuing to keep the case in the news.”