2aHawaii
General Topics => General Discussion => Topic started by: aieahound on November 22, 2021, 01:44:09 PM
-
Ahmaud Arbery trial.
Is there already a thread ?
My opinion manslaughter.
-
Ahmaud Arbery trial.
Is there already a thread ?
My opinion manslaughter.
+1
-
I am thinking manslaughter too. It does seem like they had enough reason to be suspicious of him and to call the cops and even to follow him so they could report to cops where he went. Problem was when they jumped out with a gun to confront him.
-
Georgia has a different murder statute than other states. There are no degrees of murder. It's felony murder or malice murder or manslaughter.
The prosecution doesn't have to prove intent. They don't have to prove that someone was a racist when they chased Ahmaud Arbery down the street. All they have to prove is that, in the heat of the moment, that there were bad assumptions made, that there were two different sets of opinions happening on the street that day, and they willfully killed someone because of bad assumptions.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/georgias-murder-statute-and-how-the-ahmaud-arbery-trial-may-play-out
The Citizen's Arrest law has since been repealed, but it stated at the time that the citizen must have seen a felony happen or have reasonable suspicion that a felony happened. Both of the McMichaels and Bryan have said they didn't see what had happened that day. So, to say they were making a citizen's arrest when Arbery attacked to gain possession of the shotgun is not covered under the law as it existed.
-
While this and Kyle was going on, Epstein's head pimp jury selection is today.
-
While this and Kyle was going on, Epstein's head pimp jury selection is today.
Probably should start another thread if you want to discuss yet another trial. I have a feeling there may be a lot of scrambling to quash the reporting of things said in that courtroom.
:shaka:
-
so if three black men chased a white man and killed him....
-
so if three black men chased a white man and killed him....
Blacks are in a protected class, as are all other minorities.
There has been much clamoring about the lower ratio in last year's census of Whites vs. Non-whites. The people celebrating are missing the fact that once Whites are no longer the majority, they (we) qualify for special civil rights protections -- as a minority! :thumbsup: :geekdanc:
-
Georgia has a different murder statute than other states. There are no degrees of murder. It's felony murder or malice murder or manslaughter.
The prosecution doesn't have to prove intent. They don't have to prove that someone was a racist when they chased Ahmaud Arbery down the street. All they have to prove is that, in the heat of the moment, that there were bad assumptions made, that there were two different sets of opinions happening on the street that day, and they willfully killed someone because of bad assumptions.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/georgias-murder-statute-and-how-the-ahmaud-arbery-trial-may-play-out
The Citizen's Arrest law has since been repealed, but it stated at the time that the citizen must have seen a felony happen or have reasonable suspicion that a felony happened. Both of the McMichaels and Bryan have said they didn't see what had happened that day. So, to say they were making a citizen's arrest when Arbery attacked to gain possession of the shotgun is not covered under the law as it existed.
I can see how the guy with the gun gets charged with murder but I can't see how the other two got a murder charge. They were there and they were following Arbery but they didn't pull the trigger.
Honestly I haven't followed that trial closely so I don't know if there are other factors at play. Like if for example they yelled "shoot him" then now they are contributing.
Also, Arbery was supposed to be in the neighbors house for quite a while IIRC so I think they have a decent case to argue they had reason to be suspicious. I don't know how well they made that case though.
With all the terrible news reporting on the Rittenhouse case I need to find a good reliable news source to help me understand the Arbery case better.
-
I can see how the guy with the gun gets charged with murder but I can't see how the other two got a murder charge. They were there and they were following Arbery but they didn't pull the trigger.
Honestly I haven't followed that trial closely so I don't know if there are other factors at play. Like if for example they yelled "shoot him" then now they are contributing.
Also, Arbery was supposed to be in the neighbors house for quite a while IIRC so I think they have a decent case to argue they had reason to be suspicious. I don't know how well they made that case though.
With all the terrible news reporting on the Rittenhouse case I need to find a good reliable news source to help me understand the Arbery case better.
The three men acted in concert to chase, trap, and detain the deceased. They all Intentionally aided or abetted the in the commission of the crimes right up until the shooting.
According to Georgia law O.C.G.A. §16-2-20, every person concerned in the commission of a crime is a party thereto and may be charged with and convicted of commission of the crime.
Georgia is actually more lenient than many states. Georgia allows for defenses based on no criminal intent, that the associate was "just at the scene" but took no part in any facet of the crime, or didn't encourage the illegal acts.
Some other states can charge you with the highest charge even if you decided to stay home but had a hand in planning or providing material support (with knowledge) to the crime. I just heard of a guy who helped plan a robbery, decided the day of to stay in bed and not participate, and was later arrested when his co-conspirators told Cops he was in on the planning. Imagine getting rousted out of bed by SWAT for your buddies' crimes committed while you slept! In those cases, if you did nothing to prevent the crime or alert authorities prior to it, you can't claim you were not part of the conspiracy.
-
Also, Arbery was supposed to be in the neighbors house for quite a while IIRC so I think they have a decent case to argue they had reason to be suspicious.
When did they call 911 ?
And watch the video. It’s not long.
-
Also, Arbery was supposed to be in the neighbors house for quite a while IIRC so I think they have a decent case to argue they had reason to be suspicious.
"The Citizen's Arrest law has since been repealed, but it stated at the time that the citizen must have seen a felony happen or have reasonable suspicion that a felony happened."
Explain how "suspicious" translates into "reasonable suspicion that a felony happened."
What felony did they suspect him of committing? The law is written so citizens don't try to arrest someone for minor crimes. Trespassing, theft of some unknown property value and running are not felonies. He was obviously incapable of carrying off much of anything to meet the requirement of felony theft. There are several felony theft categories, but for this case, he would have had to have stolen property valued at $25,000.00 or more. What could a man traveling on foot possibly be stealing in a home that's unoccupied which could be worth $25K?
-
Guilty. Murder.
All three.
-
Guilty. Murder.
All three.
That is what the jury said. Although they made it political when they included the guy who just videoed
the crime. That is a stretch.
One thing that is for certain is, the four men should all be convicted of stupidity.
-
All three Ahmaud Arbery killers face life behind
bars after they're found GUILTY of his murder:
Cheers erupt in court after jury rejected their self-
defense claims against unarmed black jogger
The men face minimum sentences of life in prison. It is up to the judge to decide
whether that comes with or without the possibility of parole.
The three men have also been indicted on separate federal hate crime charges,
including interference with rights and attempted kidnapping. The McMichaels were
also charged with using, carrying, brandishing and discharging a firearm during
and in relation to a crime of violence. All three men pleaded not guilty.
The federal trial is set to take place in February. If convicted, they could each face
an additional penalty of up to life in prison. Since the defendants were being held
on state charges, a federal bond hearing has not been set.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10239523/Jury-reaches-verdict-Ahmaud-Arbery-trial-protesters-gather-outside.html
-
When did they call 911 ?
And watch the video. It’s not long.
I don't think they watched the video, just one of the neighbors saw Arbery go in the neighbors house.
IIRC they did call the cops, they claimed they were following so they could help police locate Arbery.
-
"The Citizen's Arrest law has since been repealed, but it stated at the time that the citizen must have seen a felony happen or have reasonable suspicion that a felony happened."
Explain how "suspicious" translates into "reasonable suspicion that a felony happened."
What felony did they suspect him of committing? The law is written so citizens don't try to arrest someone for minor crimes. Trespassing, theft of some unknown property value and running are not felonies. He was obviously incapable of carrying off much of anything to meet the requirement of felony theft. There are several felony theft categories, but for this case, he would have had to have stolen property valued at $25,000.00 or more. What could a man traveling on foot possibly be stealing in a home that's unoccupied which could be worth $25K?
I am not commenting on whether they had probable cause or reasonable suspicion to stop the man. I just said they had reason to be suspicious. See an unknown man peeking around a neighbors house is enough to justify calling the cops. And legally they could get in their car and follow him to update on where he was going to cops could respond and investigate.
-
The three men acted in concert to chase, trap, and detain the deceased. They all Intentionally aided or abetted the in the commission of the crimes right up until the shooting.
According to Georgia law O.C.G.A. §16-2-20, every person concerned in the commission of a crime is a party thereto and may be charged with and convicted of commission of the crime.
Georgia is actually more lenient than many states. Georgia allows for defenses based on no criminal intent, that the associate was "just at the scene" but took no part in any facet of the crime, or didn't encourage the illegal acts.
Some other states can charge you with the highest charge even if you decided to stay home but had a hand in planning or providing material support (with knowledge) to the crime. I just heard of a guy who helped plan a robbery, decided the day of to stay in bed and not participate, and was later arrested when his co-conspirators told Cops he was in on the planning. Imagine getting rousted out of bed by SWAT for your buddies' crimes committed while you slept! In those cases, if you did nothing to prevent the crime or alert authorities prior to it, you can't claim you were not part of the conspiracy.
That would be my first suspicion, of course this is a little different than a premeditated crime. I know that generally all three had a role in following him but I don't know the specific details of what the two who didn't shoot Arbery did. Did they yell "shoot him" or something like that? Surely the prosecution must have had something of substance more than "lets follow this suspicious male". In all the articles I have read I didn't see the details of their charges. In know they didn't go on the stand.
If you witnessed a suspicious male coming out of one neighbors house and told another neighbor about the suspicious male but the neighbor kills him I just can't see justifying a murder charge just because you told the neighbor to watch the suspicious male.
-
That would be my first suspicion, of course this is a little different than a premeditated crime. I know that generally all three had a role in following him but I don't know the specific details of what the two who didn't shoot Arbery did. Did they yell "shoot him" or something like that? Surely the prosecution must have had something of substance more than "lets follow this suspicious male". In all the articles I have read I didn't see the details of their charges. In know they didn't go on the stand.
If you witnessed a suspicious male coming out of one neighbors house and told another neighbor about the suspicious male but the neighbor kills him I just can't see justifying a murder charge just because you told the neighbor to watch the suspicious male.
That was not the extent of the neighbor's involvement. He used his truck to help stop Arbery. I think the father even said Arbery was "trapped like a rat" between the trucks.
Nohilly said McMichael told him Arbery “wasn’t out for no Sunday jog. He was getting the hell
out of there.”
He told Nohilly that they started chasing Arbery to stop him from escaping, according to a transcript
of the interview the detective read in court.
“He was trapped like a rat,” McMichael told the detective. “I think he was wanting to flee and he
realized that you know he was not going to get away.”
Nohilly testified that he asked McMichael why he was chasing Arbery, saying, “Did this guy break
into a house today?”
“Well that’s just it, I don’t know,” McMichael said, according to a transcript.
https://nypost.com/2021/11/10/ahmaud-arbery-trapped-like-a-rat-before-being-killed-trial/
Here's a breakdown and explanation of each charge:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/arbery-case-charges-breakdown-of-the-charges
-
I am not commenting on whether they had probable cause or reasonable suspicion to stop the man. I just said they had reason to be suspicious. See an unknown man peeking around a neighbors house is enough to justify calling the cops. And legally they could get in their car and follow him to update on where he was going to cops could respond and investigate.
People who see suspicious activities or individuals can take pictures or video, write down license plates if they see any, write down times and actions .... and give that to the Cops after calling 911.
Can't just follow people that are "suspicious" unless you can do so without interfering with them. Unless you are law enforcement, the property owner or hired security., you have no business or authority to even ask someone what they are doing. Observe, record, follow and report is all you can do.
-
Now former DA got arrested and charged with delaying and showing favoritism to the McMichaels.
https://news.yahoo.com/she-spend-time-prison-former-000000762.html
-
Now former DA got arrested and charged with delaying and showing favoritism to the McMichaels.
https://news.yahoo.com/she-spend-time-prison-former-000000762.html
I was reading that. Definite ethics violations justifying firing her but it seems difficult to reach obstruction charges.
-
People who see suspicious activities or individuals can take pictures or video, write down license plates if they see any, write down times and actions .... and give that to the Cops after calling 911.
Can't just follow people that are "suspicious" unless you can do so without interfering with them. Unless you are law enforcement, the property owner or hired security., you have no business or authority to even ask someone what they are doing. Observe, record, follow and report is all you can do.
You can follow them, but not detain them.
-
The news mentioned the governor repealed it after the Arbery incident but something about Georgia has a law where citizens can make an arrest if they see someone committing a felony crime.
And in my opinion Arbery wasn't committing no felony. He was just jogging down the street. And I could be wrong but the video of him looking around in that unfinished house can't be a felony could it?
Anyway the verdict has been reached. In my opinion a correct one.
-
You can follow them, but not detain them.
And, if they see you following, they can call the Cops on you to report a "suspicious person following them."
There's that adjective again.
-
The news mentioned the governor repealed it after the Arbery incident but something about Georgia has a law where citizens can make an arrest if they see someone committing a felony crime.
And in my opinion Arbery wasn't committing no felony. He was just jogging down the street. And I could be wrong but the video of him looking around in that unfinished house can't be a felony could it?
Anyway the verdict has been reached. In my opinion a correct one.
Apparently it's a "thing" that people do -- visiting homes while under construction. There are some who are out browsing properties and just want to self-view the homes without a realtor or developer talking to them. Others may just be curious what a new home looks like halfway complete.
Unless there are No Trespassing signs posted, or the individual was warned to stay off the property before, there's no felony trespass.
-
And, if they see you following, they can call the Cops on you to report a "suspicious person following them."
There's that adjective again.
Perfectly fine. The dispatcher would get both calls, see they are likely related and officers could respond.
-
The news mentioned the governor repealed it after the Arbery incident but something about Georgia has a law where citizens can make an arrest if they see someone committing a felony crime.
And in my opinion Arbery wasn't committing no felony. He was just jogging down the street. And I could be wrong but the video of him looking around in that unfinished house can't be a felony could it?
Anyway the verdict has been reached. In my opinion a correct one.
If Arbery stole something while inside the home then it could constitute a felony but at the very least it would be a trespass.
2 of the 3 accused didn't testify so we never really got to hear what they saw, what they knew, and what they were thinking.
I think manslaughter would be a more appropriate charge personally.
-
Perfectly fine. The dispatcher would get both calls, see they are likely related and officers could respond.
Thanks, Captain Obvious.
You said the neighbor had "reason to be suspicious," but you stop short of giving any context as to why that even matters.
#ContextShmontext
-
Thanks, Captain Obvious.
You said the neighbor had "reason to be suspicious," but you stop short of giving any context as to why that even matters.
#ContextShmontext
It matters because it explains why they called police and why they followed him.
-
It matters because it explains why they called police and why they followed him.
Doesn't explain why they trapped him and attempted a citizen's arrest. They said they thought he was trying to get away. Get away from whom? Get away with what?
Sounds like you're trying to justify the murder because of "suspicion."
-
Doesn't explain why they trapped him and attempted a citizen's arrest. They said they thought he was trying to get away. Get away from whom? Get away with what?
Sounds like you're trying to justify the murder because of "suspicion."
Do you think their intent was to shoot him? To me it doesn't look like that. It looked to me like Ahmaud stopped running and they exited the truck to grab him. Once they exited Ahmaud turned to confront his pursuers. I don't think Ahmaud was trapped, the cars were just behind him on the road. Maybe he was tired of running (literally or metaphorically)?
-
Do you think their intent was to shoot him? To me it doesn't look like that. It looked to me like Ahmaud stopped running and they exited the truck to grab him. Once they exited Ahmaud turned to confront his pursuers. I don't think Ahmaud was trapped, the cars were just behind him on the road. Maybe he was tired of running (literally or metaphorically)?
I think their intent was to detain him using any means necessary.
You weren't there. Someone who was there described Arbery as "trapped like a rat." What you believe something "looks like" is irrelevant to the context.
-
I think there intent was to detain him using any means necessary.
You weren't there. Someone who was there described Arbery as "trapped like a rat." What you believe something "looks like" is irrelevant to the context.
I wasn't there and I don't read minds thats why I can only comment on what it looked like.
I don't think there was a lot of planning in this, just reaction.
-
I wasn't there and I don't read minds thats why I can only comment on what it looked like.
I don't think there was a lot of planning in this, just reaction.
Were they tried for conspiracy? Why is planning an element of the crime? Are you referring to a statute that should have been applied to the case and wasn't?
-
https://youtu.be/N3JDE_ZfgSE
-
Those 3 men will have a lot of time to contemplate their actions. Behind bars. One of them probably a lifetime to replay the scenario over and over in his mind......
Only they know what they were really thinking.
-
Do you think their intent was to shoot him? To me it doesn't look like that. It looked to me like Ahmaud stopped running and they exited the truck to grab him. Once they exited Ahmaud turned to confront his pursuers. I don't think Ahmaud was trapped, the cars were just behind him on the road. Maybe he was tired of running (literally or metaphorically)?
I don't think the intent was to use deadly force to stop him, but for me it looks like Ahmaud saw a gunman in the left if the truck and went to the right. The next time you see him it looks like he is charging the armed man directly in front of the truck. In subsequent videos you can see his body maybe 100 ft in front of the truck, so I'm assuming he is being chased by a gunman, fearing the worst. In that senerio, would you, as Ahumad, turn your back on the gunman and keep running? I would have to assume, with a gunman chasing him, it was fight or die.
-
Those 3 men will have a lot of time to contemplate their actions. Behind bars. One of them probably a lifetime to replay the scenario over and over in his mind......
Only they know what they were really thinking.
This is why my mentality is I rather be wrong and go home, than try and prove I'm right and end up in jail. They aren't the cops, it's not their property, call 911.
-
I don't think the intent was to use deadly force to stop him, but for me it looks like Ahmaud saw a gunman in the left if the truck and went to the right. The next time you see him it looks like he is charging the armed man directly in front of the truck. In subsequent videos you can see his body maybe 100 ft in front of the truck, so I'm assuming he is being chased by a gunman, fearing the worst. In that senerio, would you, as Ahumad, turn your back on the gunman and keep running? I would have to assume, with a gunman chasing him, it was fight or die.
Since he is dead, there is no way to get his side of the story.
-
Were they tried for conspiracy? Why is planning an element of the crime? Are you referring to a statute that should have been applied to the case and wasn't?
You aren't tried for conspiracy to commit a crime if you complete the crime.
My comment wasn't about elements of the crime, only what I observed on the video.
-
I don't think the intent was to use deadly force to stop him, but for me it looks like Ahmaud saw a gunman in the left if the truck and went to the right. The next time you see him it looks like he is charging the armed man directly in front of the truck. In subsequent videos you can see his body maybe 100 ft in front of the truck, so I'm assuming he is being chased by a gunman, fearing the worst. In that senerio, would you, as Ahumad, turn your back on the gunman and keep running? I would have to assume, with a gunman chasing him, it was fight or die.
Imagine if Arbury had been armed and he shot at the males chasing him in the truck. As long as he hadn't actually committed any crime it likely would have been a justified shooting.
-
You aren't tried for conspiracy to commit a crime if you complete the crime.
My comment wasn't about elements of the crime, only what I observed on the video.
Bull. People are charged with conspiracy all the time as lesser charges, just in case the state doesn't make their case for the "completed criminal charge."
The video is lacking. To form an opinion based solely on that and exclude the testimony that's already part of the official record is lazy at best.
-
Bull. People are charged with conspiracy all the time as lesser charges, just in case the state doesn't make their case for the "completed criminal charge."
The video is lacking. To form an opinion based solely on that and exclude the testimony that's already part of the official record is lazy at best.
I suppose I should say someone doesn't usually get convicted for the crime as well as conspiracy to commit the crime. They may be charged with both to give the jury a lesser charge option.
I am not forming my overall opinion on only what the video is showing though, I am just saying what I think the video alone shows. Of course the ultimate decision is on the entirety of the case.
-
I suppose I should say someone doesn't usually get convicted for the crime as well as conspiracy to commit the crime. They may be charged with both to give the jury a lesser charge option.
I am not forming my overall opinion on only what the video is showing though, I am just saying what I think the video alone shows. Of course the ultimate decision is on the entirety of the case.
I figured you wouldn't do any research.
You can be convicted of both a crime and conspircy to commit said crime. It happens a lot, just to add to the sentencing.
For example:
Shavis Toby was convicted of second-degree murder and conspiracy to commit second-degree murder.
https://news.yahoo.com/toby-brothers-one-convicted-murder-235338771.html
It's not hard to understand. Each charge is a separate crime. Not only are the two not mutually exclusive, they are more often than not using many of the same elements as evidence.
The only time conspiracy can't be charged is when the defendant acted alone through all stages of the crime with nobody else knowing what he was planning.
-
I figured you wouldn't do any research.
You can be convicted of both a crime and conspircy to commit said crime. It happens a lot, just to add to the sentencing.
For example:
https://news.yahoo.com/toby-brothers-one-convicted-murder-235338771.html
It's not hard to understand. Each charge is a separate crime. Not only are the two not mutually exclusive, they are more often than not using many of the same elements as evidence.
The only time conspiracy can't be charged is when the defendant acted alone through all stages of the crime with nobody else knowing what he was planning.
Ok, brain fart here on my part. I was thinking of something completely different when we were talking about conspiracy. You are correct, people can be charged and convicted with the crime and the conspiracy to commit the same crime