After three weeks of courtroom debate and discussion, the criminal case against Jeremy Christian rests in the jury's hands.

On Wednesday, jurors heard closing arguments from both Christian's defense attorneys and the state's prosecution. While both sides agreed on the basics of the case—that Christian killed two men, and severely wounded another, on a MAX train on May 26, 2017—three points of contention emerged between the prosecution and defense.

These disagreements could have a bearing on the severity of charges Christian is—or isn’t—convicted of.

Christian is facing a total of 12 criminal charges for his 2017 actions . From the Mercury’s previous reporting:

Christian, 37, is facing 12 charges for allegedly killing Ricky Best and Taliesin Namkai-Meche and attempting to kill Micah Fletcher, the three strangers who intervened after Christian boarded a MAX train on May 26, held a Book of Mormon above his head, and began shouting about killing Muslims, Christians, and Jews. Christian’s charges also include intimidating fellow passengers Walia Mohamed and Destinee Magnum because of their race and perceived religious beliefs. According to witnesses, the two Black teenagers were the primary focus of Christian’s tirade that afternoon. Mohamed was wearing a hijab, a headscarf signifying her Muslim faith, at the time.

Christian is also charged with threatening fellow passenger Shawn Forde with a knife after Forde used his body to block Mohamed and Magnum from Christian’s sight.

Christian’s final alleged crime is against Demetria Hester, an African American woman who was allegedly assaulted by Christian on May 25, the day before the fatal MAX encounter, after she confronted him for spouting yet another racist rant on a MAX train.

Christian has pled not guilty to all charges, and has rejected the idea that his actions were at all biased.

Christian’s trial has played out over the last three weeks, with eyewitnesses, psychological experts, and character witnesses providing testimony for both sides. (You can read Mercury recaps of the prosecution’s testimony and defense’s testimony.)

On Wednesday, attorneys pitched their final argument to the jury.

“It doesn’t even seem like I need to argue too much whether or not I proved that case to you,” said prosecuting attorney Jeff Howes during his closing argument. “The evidence is overwhelming, insurmountable. It’s indisputable the defendant did these things that are alleged.”

Defense attorney Greg Scholl saw more nuance.

“There are situations in this world that defy simple, easy description,” Scholl told the jury. “We categorize people and we categorize events as if they are all the same, as if every situation meets a formula… [but] it’s not a cut-and-dry case.”

Here are the three areas of contention that the two legal teams focused their energy on during their final day in court:

Christian’s mental state and cognitive functioning

Both the defense and the prosecution brought forth psychological academics to provide expert testimony during the trial. Those witnesses differed on whether Christian is on the autism spectrum, and how much his slow cognitive functioning may have impaired his ability to think clearly about his actions on the MAX.

Howes argued that, even if the jury presumed Christian did have autism spectrum disorder, the diagnosis “cannot account for everything he did on the MAX train.”

“Everything he did was intentional, and no diagnosis supports the suggestion that what he did wasn’t intentional,” Howes added. “He had created his own situation. He had said so many nasty things about so many groups… that of course a train full of people would’ve become upset, and would’ve reacted. That’s the reaction the defendant wanted.”

Scholl, meanwhile, acknowledged that while the defense would never argue Christian is “not guilty because he’s on the autism spectrum,” he still sees the diagnosis as “a factor.” He also pointed to expert defense testimony from psychologist Patricia Warford, who said Christian was in “a state of emotional turmoil” at the time of the stabbings because his parents had recently kicked him out and threatened to throw out his prized comic book collection.

“Sometimes people who [are on the autism spectrum] experience difficulty in knowing how to react to difficult situations,” Scholl added.

The defense also argued that Christian’s prefrontal cortex and limbic systems—the parts of the brain responsible for moderating social behavior and controlling the nervous system—were likely compromised at the time of the stabbings because of his emotional distress.

In his rebuttal, Howes accused Scholl of over-complicating the case with a “neuropsychological theory about what might have been going on” in Christian’s head.

“That’s interesting, but it’s just a theory,” Howes added.

The self-defense question

According to instructions read by Multnomah County Judge Cheryl Albrecht, the jury will have the opportunity to reduce Christian’s murder charges from first-degree to second-degree, if they believe it's warranted. A first-degree murder charge implies that the defendant intended to murder his victims, while a second-degree charge applies to murders considered more spur-of-the-moment and possibly unintentional.

The defense seemed to be aiming for those reduced charges when arguing that Christian was acting in reasonable self-defense when stabbing Best, Namkai-Meche, and Fletcher.

Scholl referenced video footage of Christian’s rant to argue that initially, nobody on the train was taking him very seriously.

“People are ignoring him, people are laughing at him, people are sending rolling eye emojis,” Scholl said. Christian’s general ranting, he argued, “is not the same thing as a threat to an individual person.”

Scholl argued that it was Namkai-Meche’s decision to film Christian, and Fletcher’s decision to try to get Christian to leave the MAX train, that escalated the situation. He said that in the high-stress situation, Christian could reasonably believe that Best, Namkai-Meche, and Fletcher were teaming up to assault him, and that the three-against-one nature of the fight was enough to justify Christian’s violent response.

Howes called that argument “a cul-de-sac, a dead-end,” and said Scholl was asking the jury to do “mental hopscotch” to believe Christian was acting in reasonable self-defense. He referenced Christian’s provocative words right before the stabbings—“do something, bitch, do something”—as proof Christian wanted to provoke a reaction from his victims.

“When [Christian’s rant] didn’t get the response he wanted, then he took it to the next level,” Howes said. “Self-defense doesn’t apply, because he’s the initial aggressor.”

Intimidation crimes

Christian is facing two counts of intimidation crimes—the Oregon legal term for a hate crime—for targeting Mohamed and Magnum, the two Black teenage girls on the train.

During the prosecution’s closing arguments, Howes described witness testimony from Shawn Forde, a man who had been on the train that day and also interacted with Christian. Forde said he saw Christian get near the girls and direct his racist and Islamophobic comments toward them.

Howes then referenced Mohamed and Magnum’s own testimony.

“Walia was crying when she saw her video [from that day],” Howes said. “Destinee was crying when she took the stand… they were still scared. It wasn’t stage fright up there... They were still scared.”

But Scholl argued that only one witness who was on the train that day, Morgan Noonan, said he had seen Christian directly speaking to Mohamed and Magnum. He said the narrative accusing Christian of targeting the two girls had been formed after the fact.

“For those charges [of intimidation] to succeed there has to be serious proof,” he said. “Memory is a funny thing, and you have to remember that. … This was a traumatic event for people, and someone could give a false statement even if they believed they were telling the truth.”

As proof of Christian’s specific ill-intent toward Mohamed and Magnum, Howes showed video of the two girls running up the stairs away from the Hollywood MAX platform after the stabbings had occurred. Mohamed dropped her backpack as she ran, because it was weighing her down. Moments later, Christian grabbed the discarded backpack.

“In one last hateful and intimidating act towards those two girls, he grabs Walia’s bag and throws it onto the freeway,” Howes said, as the video played.

Whether Christian is guilty, and exactly which charges he is guilty of, is now up to the jury to decide. During his closing argument, Scholl gave one insight that both sides seem to agree on.

“This case is not so much about what happened,” he told the jury, “but why.”