The murder of Ahmaud Arbery

#2,876
#2,876
ButchPlz said:
Please read the thread and discover for yourself that that seems to be merely part of the story.
Click to expand...
I'd ask the same of you. Please read the thread. Pay special attention to Graywolf's posts. He's a LEO that actually covers the area where the crime was committed.
 
#2,877
#2,877
ButchPlz said:
They don't, which is why this thread exists in the first place. I'm not trading barbs. I'm telling you the truth. You're acting like a bitter old man. It's not conducive to any discussion, any flexibility, and has instead probably only driven some people to look at anything you say with a massive grain of salt. I know I'm included there.
Click to expand...
Read the thread.
 
#2,878
#2,878
Behr said:
Every time you or anyone else says this, and it gets said often because this is you guys main argument..... it seems so whiney.

I still haven't seen anyone say that it is OKAY to do it. Most everyone is saying it happens a lot and and you shouldn't be defending the guys that decided to shoot and kill someone for doing it.

Absolutely amazing.
Click to expand...

Is it wrong to do it?
 
#2,880
#2,880
Rickyvol77 said:
His actions led up to the incident as well. Would he have died if he hadn't attacked the son violently and tried to take his gun?
Click to expand...

You answered this in your prior post, which is it's legally irrelevant if the aggassault stands. In "real life" it's a pretty out there move to jump an armed guy but as a matter of how the McMichaels future looks the "original sin" of aggassault (assuming it stands of course) supersedes Arbery's actions.
 
#2,885
#2,885
Rickyvol77 said:
Again, it is not DEFENDING the McMichaels by saying that Arbery was also in the wrong with his actions.
I myself have stated several times in this thread, that i wouldn't have handled the situation the way they did and that all parties involved were 100% idiots.

I AM saying that the entire set of evidence and circumstances will be what is reviewed in court, and that the rush to "these good ole boys set out to murder that poor jogger so they should get murder charges" is a bit dramatic given the facts presented so far.

I've always said if 12 jurors believe that McMichael and his son had intent to murder Arbery or was convicted of the agg. assault charge, they likely will get some kind of manslaughter charge.
If even one juror believes that Arbery was in the wrong also and that McMichael confronted him like idiots but that Arbery himself started the physical altercation and trying to take the gun away from the son, the DA overcharged and they will be set free. (Although i also believe that the Arbery family will sue them in civil court as well)

As far as "hate crimes" and other such nonsense, that won't even see the actual court hearing
Click to expand...
Ricky, being a cop, you know they only have to prove aggravated assault for this to be felony murder. Why do you keep ignoring that? You know the McMichael's had no knowledge of a crime that justified them making a citizen's arrest, so the citizen arrest gone wrong argument holds no merit. They took an illegal action and a man died. All they have to prove is that illegal action was felonious. Do that, and the charge is automatically murder by law.
 
#2,888
#2,888
GoBigOrangeUT said:
To claim that Arbery violently attacked the guy HOLDING THE GUN is the most disgusting case of victim blaming I have ever seen. It’s very clear where you stand on this.
Click to expand...
So he didn't attack him? Im not arguing for justification, i am arguing what are the actual facts
 
#2,890
#2,890
ButchPlz said:
"They took stupid actions, now they get to face the consequences."

Is it not feasible that the dead guy also took stupid actions and faced the consequences? The resident Buddhist in question doesn't seem to indicate that that was under any consideration at all anywhere.
Click to expand...

And you don't see how that suggests you believe Arbery's death was justified?
 
#2,892
#2,892
GoBigOrangeUT said:
Still no answer on whether or not it was justified to kill a guy in suspicion of trespassing.
Click to expand...

I will say it .....in my opinion without reading too much into your question. No it is not justified.

If someone is breaking into my car and im not in it....it isn't justified at all. Could I see that breaking into cars will get you killed? Yes
 
#2,894
#2,894
hndog609 said:
The problem with this is as long as the aggassault stands then the self-defense is pretty much DOA. In fact if that charge stands it actually makes aggressive actions by Arbery justified as self-defense.

Think it through legally...if person X is considered guilty of aggravated assault with a weapon how much standing do you think they have in claiming SD if the person they are assaulting decides to fight back? That's what the McMichaels defense team is up against.
Click to expand...
The McMichael's created the entire scenario with their poor choices. The claim of self defense does not hold water.
 
#2,895
#2,895
jp1 said:
I will say it .....in my opinion without reading too much into your question. No it is not justified.

If someone is breaking into my car and im not in it....it isn't justified at all. Could I see that breaking into cars will get you killed? Yes
Click to expand...

That’s all that needs to be said.
 
#2,897
#2,897
jp1 said:
I've answered your question, now I would like a return favor. Was Arbery wrong in being in the house?
Click to expand...
I’ve already answered that. If it’s proven he was the one in the house for nefarious reasons then yeah of course he’s in the wrong.
 
#2,898
#2,898
GoBigOrangeUT said:
Still no answer on whether or not it was justified to kill a guy in suspicion of trespassing.
Click to expand...

I've answered your question, now I would like a return favor. Was Arbery wrong in being in the house?
GoBigOrangeUT said:
That’s all that needs to be said.
Click to expand...

Lol. You don't get to decide what others can think about the situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrumpedUpVol and Rickyvol77
#2,899
#2,899
Rickyvol77 said:
This is the crux of the actual case. If one juror decides that the McMichaels had the right to attempt to identify or detain Arbery given the facts and circumstances and mindset of all involved, it's not aggravated assault, it's self-defense as Arbery is the one that the evidence showed initiated the physical violence. If the jury thinks the McMichaels were completely in the wrong, they will get the manslaughter charge.

The two legal teams already have their perfect juror prototype in mind, but it only takes one from the defense picks to make it through
Click to expand...
What does the law say? Sure, jurors are unpredictable, but under written law, the McMichael's were not justified in their actions.
 
#2,900
#2,900
GoBigOrangeUT said:
I’ve already answered that. If it’s proven he was the one in the house for nefarious reasons then yeah of course he’s in the wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure nefarious reasons make it right or wrong, but can you see where someone can see him being there as a problem?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top