Rodney Hinton Jr. was found guilty of charges related to the death of Hamilton County Deputy Larry Henderson.
A jury returned its verdict Friday, finding Hinton guilty of murder, two counts of reckless homicide and two counts of felonious assault.
The reckless homicide charges were allowed to be considered a lesser charge compared to the aggravated murder charges he faced.
The verdict came as jurors began the third day of deliberations.
You can watch the verdict read in full here
WLWT’s Karin Johnson was in the courtroom for the trial and provided live updates. Follow below
Hinton will be sentenced on November 16 at 9 a.m.
Hinton’s lead defense attorney, Clyde Bennett, spoke after the verdict was read, saying “the fight is not over.”
Bennett said he was glad the jury chose to accept his argument and return a guilty verdict of reckless homicide, a lesser charge compared to the more serious charges he faced, aggravated murder.
However, he added that it was not a victory and that he was disappointed with the verdict.
“I don’t consider this a victory, I wanted him to be found not guilty of all charges,” Bennett said.
Bennett said they plan to appeal.
“When I was hired by the Hinton family, I looked at Mr. Hinton and told him I was going to fight for him and I was going to go all the way, but I didn’t finish doing that,” Bennett said.
Hamilton County Sheriff Charmaine McGuffey spoke after the verdict was delivered.
“No one’s happy. It’s not a happy occasion. It’s never going to be a happy occasion for anyone. But we’re certainly happy. We want justice, and today we have justice for Larry,” McGuffey said.
Hinton was charged with driving with intent in Henderson on May 2, 2025, a day after Hinton’s son, Ryan, was fatally shot by Cincinnati police. Henderson, a Hamilton County sheriff’s deputy, was directing traffic for the University of Cincinnati graduation when the crash happened.
At trial, the defense was trying to show that Hinton was suffering a mental health crisis when he hit Henderson, because he had just watched a video of police shooting and killing his son.
Prosecutors argued Hinton was grieving and angry, but understood his actions were wrong.
The trial lasted just under two weeks, with opening statements on October 7 and jury deliberations beginning on October 20.
See previous coverage below
What the jurors didn’t hear
Local attorney Jay Clark, who followed the proceedings but is not involved in the case, said one aspect of the trial stood out: Jurors did not have access to a recorded police interrogation of Hinton.
“In general, it’s very rare,” Clark said. “Usually, if the defendant has made a statement to the police or anyone in law enforcement, particularly on these facts, I think they would normally release it.”
Clark said he also expected jurors to see body camera video documenting law enforcement’s first contact with Hinton after the crash. No such video was played during the trial.
Jurors instead heard three psychologists recount statements Hinton made during their evaluations. They never heard these interviews with Hinton’s own recorded voice.
“I don’t know if the jurors understood it. I don’t know if they realize it or not,” Clark said. “And maybe that’s something the defense will bring up in their closing: Why didn’t you hear what he said immediately afterward?”
WLWT previously obtained body camera video showing Hinton being taken into custody after leaving the hospital. He spoke only briefly in that video, which does not document officers’ first contact with him at the crash scene.
Hinton did not testify
Hinton did not take the witness stand, but he was under no obligation to testify.
The judge is expected to explain to jurors that Hinton had a constitutional right not to testify and that they cannot consider ruling against him.
“The jury instructions will cover that,” Clark said. “There will be an instruction that the defendant did not testify. You are not supposed to consider that in any way. He has the right not to testify.”
Clark said jurors may naturally want to hear a defendant’s opinion, but he thinks modern juries better understand that defendants are not required to testify.
“Human nature, however, is such that we always want to hear the other side,” Clark said. “But I think jurors are more savvy today about this than they were maybe 20 or 30 years ago.”
Insanity defense at center of trial
Psychologists who evaluated Hinton agreed that he suffered from a serious mental illness. Their disagreement centered on whether this illness prevented him from understanding the wrongfulness of his actions.
The defense’s expert witness testified that Hinton didn’t know right from wrong at the time of the accident.
Witnesses in the state’s rebuttal said Hinton was grieving, angry and in extreme emotional pain, but still knew his actions were wrong.
Reckless homicide gives jurors another option
The judge agreed to allow jurors to consider reckless homicide a lesser offense.
Clark said this option could make a unanimous verdict more likely by giving jurors an alternative to the most serious charges. However, he added that it could also create another potential point of disagreement during deliberations.
“Reckless homicide is — I don’t want to say a happy medium — but it’s a lesser murder,” Clark said. “It also gives another option that could stall him, because you now have three options instead of just your typical guilty or not guilty.”
Under Ohio law, reckless homicide is a third-degree felony punishable by a potential prison sentence of nine to 36 months. A judge would determine the sentence and Hinton would typically receive credit for time already served.
Why jury instructions are important
After closing arguments Tuesday, the judge will explain to jurors the charges, the insanity defense, the burden of proof and the rules they must follow during deliberations.
Clark said the instructions may seem technical, but they provide the jury’s legal road map.
“Instructions are law,” Clark said. “The jury decides factually what happens. They apply it to the law that the judge gives them, and that’s how the system works.”
Clark described the jury as attentive throughout the trial, including during lengthy testimony involving complex psychological terms.
Gn usa
