HOUSTON, Texas – Closing arguments have wrapped Friday and deliberations will continue Monday morning in the civil trial against the accused Santa Fe High School gunman Dimitrios Pagourtzis’ parents.
Before the trial resumed, the defense filed a brief requesting that the jury be allowed to consider if the school district, Santa Fe ISD, shares some responsibility for the shooting. This is not an attempt to make the school a defendant, but rather to include the possibility of shared responsibility in the jury’s deliberations.
Defense attorney Shari Goldsberry argued that testimony about whether the school should share some responsibility has been presented. However, plaintiffs’ attorney Alton Todd maintained that the judge had already ruled on this issue and shouldn’t have changed the decision.
Judge Jack Ewing emphasized the importance of following rules and deadlines. He noted that although the school was identified as a possible responsible party in 2019, neither side took steps to investigate the school, such as subpoenaing records or conducting discovery. The judge criticized the defense for attempting to introduce this argument at the last minute, stating that the court does not allow “trials by ambush.” He denied the defense’s request, affirming his original ruling on the matter.
The jury has been charged with 25 questions.
Deliberations will resume Monday morning
Plaintiffs’ attorney, Alton Todd, delivers closing arguments
Todd stated that there needs to be responsibility on Dimitrios, saying “he can’t walk away from this.”
“I know its been a long three weeks, but it’s also been a long six years,” he stated. “Who was in the best position to make sure this didn’t happen. Who should have known Dimitrios best, his parents. If you don’t look, you won’t see.”
Todd said when it comes to storing weapons, there was no margin of error and the consequences were too great
“You can deliver a measure of accountability, justice and respect these families have not yet received,” he said.
Todd closed his arguments.
Chris McGuire, the plaintiff’s attorney, closing arguments:
As closing arguments began in the civil trial against the parents of Dimitrios Pagourtzis, the accused Santa Fe High School shooter, plaintiffs’ attorney Clint McGuire emphasized the gravity of the case, calling it one of the most important in the country. He argued that the jury’s verdict would help define how safe millions of children can feel in school, stressing the need for justice and accountability.
McGuire outlined the premeditated nature of the shooting, explaining that Dimitrios deliberately planned the attack, choosing the art room to maximize damage and hinder police response. He cited Dimitrios’ intent, symbolized by his “Born to Kill” T-shirt and statements like “I want to destroy bloodlines for thousands of years.” McGuire argued that Dimitrios’ actions demonstrated intent, as he went to the school armed with bombs and guns.
McGuire then shifted his focus to the parents’ responsibility, arguing that they failed to secure their firearms and provide adequate mental health care for their son, despite numerous warning signs. He highlighted evidence such as the mother’s concerns in a 2017 email, the son’s deteriorating hygiene and behavior, and the parent’s knowledge of their son’s struggles yet failure to take action.
McGuire also pointed out that Pagourtzis had 57 unexcused absences, was failing courses, and had become increasingly isolated. Despite these red flags, he said the parents did not intervene. He further criticized the parents for allowing a 17-year-old with no job to spend $1,700 on 29 separate deliveries, including ammunition.
The plaintiffs’ attorney emphasized that the parents’ negligence, combined with Dimitrios’ intent, made them responsible for the tragedy. He argued that Dimitrios knew exactly what he was doing, as evidenced by his coherent writings before the shooting and his deliberate choice of the art room to inflict maximum harm.
McGuire concluded by urging the jury to deliver a verdict that would be heard loud and clear, advocating for $1.2 billion in total compensation for the victims. He stressed that this case is not about money but about sending a message: that parents must take responsibility for their children’s actions, especially when it comes to mental health and gun safety. He recounted the bravery of students who tried to save others during the shooting, underscoring the devastating and lasting impact of the tragedy on the survivors and their families.
Wrapping up his final closing statement, McGuire said this shooting was premeditated, predictable and preventable.
“Dimitrios did this because he was filled with rage. Never disputed his was depressed or not right mentally. But there is a difference between voices in your head and what he wrote. He wrote about hating how he was treated, how he was treated by the opposite sex, he was angry. He never mentions thoughts in his head,” he stated.
McGuire said they all agree that his parents “stuck their head in the sand” by admitting they knew something was wrong but didn’t know how to fix it.
“They are responsible, Dimitrios is responsible, Lucky Gunner responsible,” he said.
Attorney’s for victims and their families closing arguments:
Sherry Chandler, representing Chase Yarbrough, described how Chase was miraculously alive despite having a lead projectile lodged in his heart and a bullet he feels in his head every time he washes his hair. She highlighted his ongoing struggles with PTSD and a “shattered heart.”
Blake Apffel, attorney for Trenton Beazley, recounted how Trenton tried to barricade himself in a room during the shooting, hearing his classmates die around him, including Chris Stone. Apffel noted the lifelong grief his client will carry.
James Miller, representing the family of Sabika Sheikh, spoke about Sabika’s dreams of building bridges between Pakistan and the world, only to have those dreams end with her return in a casket.
Lawrence Tylka, representing Cynthia Tisdale’s family, shared how her son, a former cop, is haunted by grief and despair after being unable to protect his mother during the shooting, leading him to leave the police force.
Finally, Alton Todd, representing Kimberly Vaughan’s family, urged the jury to make their voices heard, even in Washington, D.C., emphasizing that while it is difficult to talk about money in the context of life, their verdict can send a powerful message.
Lori Lard, the defense attorney for the parents of Dimitrios begins closing arguments
Lori Laird, the defense attorney for the parents of Dimitrios, delivered her closing arguments, emphasizing that this tragic case is not about assigning blame, but understanding mental illness. She argued that Dimitrios’ mental illness was unforeseeable, and his parents couldn’t have predicted his actions. Laird highlighted the failures of the school and Luckygunner, while stressing that Dimitrios’ parents had no reason to suspect or monitor their son’s behavior more closely. She concluded that Dimitrios bears significant responsibility for the shooting and that his parents should not be held liable for his unforeseeable actions.
Robert Torres delivering closing arguments:
Robert Torres, in his closing arguments, emphasized accountability, arguing that both the parents of Dimitrios and Luckygunner bear responsibility for the tragic events. He criticized the use of Dimitrios as a convenient shield by both the plaintiffs and the parents, stressing that without ammunition or guns, the shooting wouldn’t have happened. Torres pointed out the dangers of allowing a 17-year-old to easily order ammunition online, condemning Luckygunner’s actions as prioritizing profit over safety. He also highlighted the parents’ duty to monitor and protect their children, arguing that they failed to recognize the red flags. Torres concluded by acknowledging that while he doesn’t think Dimitrios is a monster, but does believe he committed a monstrous act.
During the trial
From the start of the trial on July 29, we’ve heard heartbreaking testimonies from several families of the 10 people who were killed, and also those injured, when Dimitrios allegedly entered Santa Fe High School in 2018 and began opening fire.
The parents and loved ones of the 10 killed and those who were injured are calling for Dimitrios’ parents to be held responsible for the shooting, as well. The lawsuit accuses the parents of not doing more to spot signs of mental illness in their son and for not preventing him from getting access to firearms in the home. Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos have denied any wrongdoing.
The criminal case against the charged gunman remains at a standstill because Dimitrios remains incompetent to stand trial. Doctors at North Texas State Hospital in Vernon have been working to restore his competency since 2019.
Dimitrios has been in the hospital for more than 1000 days. According to state data obtained by KPRC 2 Investigates, the average time it took doctors in North Texas to restore a defendant’s competency was 229 days in fiscal year 2022, 227 days in fiscal year 2023, and 126 days in fiscal year 2024.
Some of the most powerful moments during the trial came from testimonies heard by Dimitrios’ parents and siblings, survivors of the shooting, and the psychiatrist who interviewed Dimitrios and his family in 2019 and authored the report that has been central to the case over the last week and a half.
Dimitrios’ parents and siblings denied any wrongdoings are knowing about Dimitrios’ mental state before the shooting, often referring to his changed behavior as normal of that of a teenager. The family faced heavy questioning surrounding the 17 guns, which were held in the family’s home and used during the mass attack, and how accessible they were. Both Rose and Antonios denied the weapons being accessible, saying the cabinet in which they were kept remained locked and was checked often.
The last person to testify during the trial was Dr. Bradley Peterson, a psychiatrist and expert in childhood disorders. His testimony focused on Dimitrios’ mental state. Hired by the defense, Peterson conducted interviews in 2019 with Dimitrios and his family. He diagnosed Dimitrios with schizoaffective disorder, noting severe psychosis and delusions involving a demi-god named Natasha and the CIA’s MK-Ultra program. Peterson emphasized that Dimitrios’ mental disorders, including paranoia and a thought disorder, significantly influenced his actions during the 2018 school shooting.
Peterson highlighted that Dimitrios’ family was unaware of the severity of his condition, mistaking his symptoms for typical behavior. He stressed that Dimitrios’ delusions made it difficult for him to differentiate between reality and fantasy, impacting his ability to discern right from wrong. The psychiatrist defended the validity of Dimitrios’ symptoms, asserting they were consistent with his diagnosis and difficult to fabricate.
The judge ruled that Peterson could only testify about the mental illness observed during his interviews with Dimitrios, not about what the parents or school should have known. The plaintiffs argued that Dimitrios’ parents missed clear signs of mental illness, while the defense maintained that the parents took appropriate measures and that Dimitrios concealed his mental state.
The plaintiff’s and Dimitrios’s parents’ defense team will get one hour and 20 minutes for closing arguments and Dimitrios’s defense attorney will get 45 minutes.
Stay updated on Santa Fe Trial:
Santa Fe trial will likely extend beyond initial three-week timeline, according to judge
Parents of accused Santa Fe HS gunman want school district added to civil lawsuit
Santa Fe trial: Accused gunman Dimitrios Pagourtzis’ younger sister testifies
Santa Fe HS shooting trial day 8: Survivor Chase Yarbrough testifies, says life ‘completely changed’