The murder of Ahmaud Arbery

[ClearwaterVol]

Getting an indictment for murder shouldn't be difficult. I would imagine pleas to manslaughter would be offered, and I would think manslaughter would probably be the charge that gets brought to trial.

Why? It would be a lesser included which the jury would be free to convict upon.

 

[bamawriter]

You really need to read the article. They already admitted to the cops they were in "hot pursuit" and were attempting to make a "citizen's arrest."

Their lawyer has made that case the media, too. And given that they didn't have any immediate knowledge of a crime, no judge worth his salt should let that defense see a jury.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

That doesnt mean they pointed guns at the guy, and there is NO EVIDENCE that they did

How would he make the citizen's arrest with a rifle in his hands and not using it as a threat?

 

[bamawriter]

Why? It would be a lesser included which the jury would be free to convict upon.

But you have to present the greater charge. Easier to present and get a conviction on manslaughter than present murder and try to get a conviction on manslaughter without the jury even hearing the term until judge's instructions.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Is chasing after a cop while brandishing a gun a threat to the officer?

If an officer is chasing after a suspect who turns and starts to punch him and grab his gun, what is the likely course of action?
If an officer has a subject, with a gun in his possession and is yelling at him, does he automatically have the right to shoot him?
I once had a younger kid pull a kitchen knife out of his ear (he stabbed himself) and walk towards me from a distance of about 20 ft...could i have shot him? absolutely, but i de-escalated the situation. Which is what both parties IN THIS INCIDENT shouldve done. I have stated time and again i didnt agree with the actions of the ex-officer and son, HOWEVER, the actual shooting and death in this case occurred when the suspect ran to attack the son and grab his gun. That is the main crutch of this debate

 

[volfanhill]

If an officer is chasing after a suspect who turns and starts to punch him and grab his gun, what is the likely course of action?
If an officer has a subject, with a gun in his possession and is yelling at him, does he automatically have the right to shoot him?
I once had a younger kid pull a kitchen knife out of his ear (he stabbed himself) and walk towards me from a distance of about 20 ft...could i have shot him? absolutely, but i de-escalated the situation. Which is what both parties IN THIS INCIDENT shouldve done. I have stated time and again i didnt agree with the actions of the ex-officer and son, HOWEVER, the actual shooting and death in this case occurred when the suspect ran to attack the son and grab his gun. That is the main crutch of this debate

You didn’t answer my question. Is an armed person running after a cop a threat to the cop?

 

[Rickyvol77]

How would he make the citizen's arrest with a rifle in his hands and not using it as a threat?

you can't even get the facts straight, he didn't have a rifle, they had a shotgun and a .357 handgun. And do you realize that regular citizens detain people everyday with and without firearms, and don't all have to point them at the suspects to do so?

 

[bamawriter]

HOWEVER, the actual shooting and death in this case occurred when the suspect ran to attack the son and grab his gun. That is the main crutch of this debate

That ignores the fact that they armed themselves and attempted to detain a person without having the slightest right to do so. You cannot willfully create a dangerous situation and then shoot your way out of it.

 

[hndog609]

Intent can be formed in an instant. When he pulled the trigger while aiming at the guy... intent to kill.

What had been posited was that even before engaging in the actual pursuit the outcome of the person dying was intended result. I find that dubious on it's own and next to impossible to legally prove.

 

[bamawriter]

you can't even get the facts straight, he didn't have a rifle, they had a shotgun and a .357 handgun. And do you realize that regular citizens detain people everyday with and without firearms, and don't all have to point them at the suspects to do so?

And if those citizens didn't witness a crime, then they broke the law when they detained those people.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

What had been posited was that even before engaging in the actual pursuit the outcome of the person dying was intended result. I find that dubious on it's own and next to impossible to legally prove.

My point was that is not what the prosecution must prove.

 

[BreatheUT]

If they intended to kill him why call 911, why attempt to stop and talk to him? I could go on and on.

Honestly you are on the verge of being as unobjective as 77 is on this case.

First, I will say I just saw this thread this morning because I've been enjoying the barrage of sports news.

Second, that means I'm aver 500 posts behind plus I am working.

Third, I have not looked into this very much so I'm uninformed about the latest details of this case.

So they called 911? If so, when? Was that before or after they shot him? And who was the witness that captured the shooting footage that we saw?

I use common sense based on the set of facts I have. Meaning maybe I don't have all the facts but I am also aware we have some terrific spin masters on here on both sides.

 

[Rickyvol77]

That ignores the fact that they armed themselves and attempted to detain a person without having the slightest right to do so. You cannot willfully create a dangerous situation and then shoot your way out of it.

The closest you have is that they are responsible under civil court for the events which led to the death of this guy. I think his family has a much stronger case for suing them for damages rather than any criminal charges. especially the more i read about Georgia state law on murder

 

[Rickyvol77]

And if those citizens didn't witness a crime, then they broke the law when they detained those people.

and if a jury decides that they did break a law detaining him, it's STILL not murder as he was the one who initiated the assault

 

[bamawriter]

The closest you have is that they are responsible under civil court for the events which led to the death of this guy. I think his family has a much stronger case for suing them for damages rather than any criminal charges. especially the more i read about Georgia state law on murder

In my layman's opinion, manslaughter is a more appropriate charge.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

you can't even get the facts straight, he didn't have a rifle, they had a shotgun and a .357 handgun. And do you realize that regular citizens detain people everyday with and without firearms, and don't all have to point them at the suspects to do so?

Okay a shot gun. I agree with everything you said. However, in this case we know Barney Fife had a shot gun. How does he make a citizen's arrest while holding a shotgun and not have the presence of the gun be considered a threat?

 

[bamawriter]

and if a jury decides that they did break a law detaining him, it's STILL not murder as he was the one who initiated the assault

You are digging in on him willfully initiating an assault and are completely dismissing any notion that he acted in self defense. Your argument is beyond obtuse.

 

[BreatheUT]

what makes you think they set out to kill him from the beginning? that's a heavy stretch

I don't know maybe it's the one person already standing in the bed of the truck with a loaded gun. Just a wild guess. I'm guess you drive down the highway with someone in the back of a truck with a loaded gun when it's only you and one other person?

 

[bamawriter]

I don't know maybe it's the one person already standing in the bed of the truck with a loaded gun. Just a wild guess. I'm guess you drive down the highway with someone in the back of a truck with a loaded gun when it's only you and one other person?

I'm trying not to get too hung up on intent, but this is a really good point that shouldn't be ignored.

 

[Rickyvol77]

In my layman's opinion, manslaughter is a more appropriate charge.

Here is the Georgia State law for manslaughter:

• Voluntary manslaughter – Voluntary manslaughter occurs when a person intentionally kills another while under the influence of a sudden and violent passion. This passion must be caused by a serious provocation that would create such passion in a reasonable person. An example of a sufficient provocation would be a person catching his or her spouse in the act of adultery. Voluntary manslaughter is punishable by one to 20 years in prison.
• Involuntary manslaughter – Involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing of another person. The killing must result from illegal or reckless conduct by the perpetrator. The maximum penalty for involuntary manslaughter is ten years in prison. Involuntary manslaughter may also be a misdemeanor, punishable by less than one year in prison, under certain circumstances.

Seems to me Voluntary manslaughter is not provable in this case, and involuntary would hinge on a jury stating that the shooting itself (self-defense) is illegal or reckless.
I think the problem here is that again the guy is the one who attacked the son and tried to grab the gun, that is 100% self-defense of the son to shoot said guy. I am sure the DA will try to argue the overall pursuit and such was illegal and reckless, but the shooting itself was not

 

[KB5252]

First, I will say I just saw this thread this morning because I've been enjoying the barrage of sports news.

Second, that means I'm aver 500 posts behind plus I am working.

Third, I have not looked into this very much so I'm uninformed about the latest details of this case.

So they called 911? If so, when? Was that before or after they shot him? And who was the witness that captured the shooting footage that we saw?

I use common sense based on the set of facts I have. Meaning maybe I don't have all the facts but I am also aware we have some terrific spin masters on here on both sides.

They did call 911 while chasing the guy. And were told to stop but they continued. As for the videographer, I'm not sure but I believe the consensus is they were with the party that shot the guy, not sure if that has been confirmed. The two men chasing were a retired DA and a police officer.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Okay a shot gun. I agree with everything you said. However, in this case we know Barney Fife had a shot gun. How does he make a citizen's arrest while holding a shotgun and not have the presence of the gun be considered a threat?

Fair enough, but there is a HUGE HUGE legal difference between:

- I have a gun in a holster on my body that you can see
- I have a gun in my hands but its pointed down to the ground
- I have a gun in my hands pointed straight at you.

We only know the first two things happened, if they come out and new evidence shows that the guys pointed them at the guy and stated "you better stop a**hole or i'll shoot you" i would say that would change my opinion of the initial encounter.

 

[bamawriter]

Here is the Georgia State law for manslaughter:

• Voluntary manslaughter – Voluntary manslaughter occurs when a person intentionally kills another while under the influence of a sudden and violent passion. This passion must be caused by a serious provocation that would create such passion in a reasonable person. An example of a sufficient provocation would be a person catching his or her spouse in the act of adultery. Voluntary manslaughter is punishable by one to 20 years in prison.
• Involuntary manslaughter – Involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing of another person. The killing must result from illegal or reckless conduct by the perpetrator. The maximum penalty for involuntary manslaughter is ten years in prison. Involuntary manslaughter may also be a misdemeanor, punishable by less than one year in prison, under certain circumstances.

The sufficient provocation would be the guy you've been illegally pursuing suddenly lunging for your gun.

Their pursuit of Arbery was arguably reckless and undoubtedly illegal.

 

[Rickyvol77]

You are digging in on him willfully initiating an assault and are completely dismissing any notion that he acted in self defense. Your argument is beyond obtuse.

When you have the option to continue running away, it's not self defense to double back 40 feet and starting a punching a guy in the face, or attempting to steal his gun away from him, you better articulate self-defense better than that.

 

[KB5252]

The sufficient provocation would be the guy you've been illegally pursuing suddenly lunging for your gun.

Their pursuit of Arbery was arguably reckless and undoubtedly illegal.

Agreed.