The murder of Ahmaud Arbery

#927
#927
Two armed men chase down and confront an unarmed man. The unarmed man is shot dead and somehow it's his fault?
 
#929
#929
Chris4Vols22 said:
@Rickyvol77 play devil's advocate with me bro.
Click to expand...
I have stated if there is evidence that the two guys pointed their guns at the suspect before hand or stated something along the lines of "stop or ill shoot you", i would feel there is more legal debate to be had. If the suspect had a gun, and stated he felt threatened and shot at them, then i feel his articulation of facts and what happened leads it to be much more up in the air.

The problem is there is NO evidence of actual pointing the gun or making threats towards the guy, their intent was clearly to try to identify/detain as they were stating as two different people called 911 on the incident to get police there.

If the suspect had been running away and the guy shot him, i'd say YEP 100% manslaughter easily.

The shooting happened solely because the suspect turned and ran back towards them and physically attacked the son and tried to steal his gun. This changed the entire encounter from two idiots being idiots to a true life and death situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNVOLNAVY
#930
#930
Rickyvol77 said:
I also thought it was interesting that the DA stated one of the reasons for not charging, was because there was no way of knowing if the suspect actually fatally shot himself by pulling the trigger on the gun while trying to get it away from the son.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I find it more interesting the DA had no interest in charging someone who used to work for her office. Glad she recused herself. The current DA working on the case is making the proper choice IMO. Take it to a GJ and let them decide. I absolutely think they should be charged, but if the GJ refuses to indict, I can at least respect the process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#931
#931
Hunerwadel said:
Two armed men chase down and confront an unarmed man. The unarmed man is shot dead and somehow it's his fault?
Click to expand...
the unarmed man is dead because he chose to attack a guy and try to steal his gun and EITHER the son shot him in self-defense OR the gun went off during the struggle
 
#932
#932
TheDeeble said:
I'm just saying this in regards to a statement made earlier on "would he still be alive if he hadn't made a grab for the shotgun." Would the guys in the truck have shot otherwise? I think it's a fair assumption to say no.
Click to expand...
He would still be alive if they hadn't armed themselves and pursued him to begin with. He would still be alive if the man who "just wanted to talk" got out of his truck without shotgun in tow. The actions of the two men directly led to the death of another man. That, IMO, is easily manslaughter. If you "just want to talk", why do you need a shotgun to do it? Especially when your backup in the bed of the truck is armed as well?
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Vol376
#933
#933
Weezer said:
Maybe, but I find it more interesting the DA had no interest in charging someone who used to work for her office. Glad she recused herself. The current DA working on the case is making the proper choice IMO. Take it to a GJ and let them decide. I absolutely think they should be charged, but if the GJ refuses to indict, I can at least respect the process.
Click to expand...
Weezer, i 100% agree with this, if the grand jury comes back and says yep manslaughter, i disagree but i understand the decision because those two guys made mistakes
If they come back and say not guilty of manslaughter, i agree but i would also hope his family takes them to civil court to sue because that's a different ball game.
If they try to push murder through, that's an overreach and not the case

To me if i was going to prosecute these two, i would push for a likely actual charge of something like false imprisonment and focus on the legality of THAT, because defense attorneys will argue all day long the actual law of self-defense protects the son from the attack that the suspect was doing. The suspect CHOSE that and got shot as a result
 
#935
#935
Rickyvol77 said:
the unarmed man is dead because he chose to attack a guy and try to steal his gun and EITHER the son shot him in self-defense OR the gun went off during the struggle
Click to expand...
That's ONE way of looking at it. You could also think, "gee, if they were only wanting to talk, why did the one that chose to approach him feel the need to bring his shotgun to begin with?" Their actions were clearly negligent, and ignorance is not an excuse in a court of law. Those negligent actions clearly led to a man being dead. He'd be alive if not for a weapon to even wrestle over. The dad in the bed of the truck had a gun. He could easily have provided protection for his son without the son feeling the need to approach with shotgun in hand. To say the two men made "bad choices" is an understatement. Their choices led to the death of someone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Vol376 and Rickyvol77
#936
#936
Rickyvol77 said:
Weezer, i 100% agree with this, if the grand jury comes back and says yep manslaughter, i disagree but i understand the decision because those two guys made mistakes
If they come back and say not guilty of manslaughter, i agree but i would also hope his family takes them to civil court to sue because that's a different ball game.
If they try to push murder through, that's an overreach and not the case

To me if i was going to prosecute these two, i would push for a likely actual charge of something like false imprisonment and focus on the legality of THAT, because defense attorneys will argue all day long the actual law of self-defense protects the son from the attack that the suspect was doing. The suspect CHOSE that and got shot as a result
Click to expand...
You're overlooking all the choices the two men made that led up to what happened. They're responsible for their actions, and they brought the guns to the fight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Vol376, bamawriter and Behr
#939
#939
Weezer said:
That's ONE way of looking at it. You could also think, "gee, if they were only wanting to talk, why did the one that chose to approach him feel the need to bring his shotgun to begin with?" Their actions were clearly negligent, and ignorance is not an excuse in a court of law. Those negligent actions clearly led to a man being dead. He'd be alive if not for a weapon to even wrestle over. The dad in the bed of the truck had a gun. He could easily have provided protection for his son without the son feeling the need to approach with shotgun in hand. To say the two men made "bad choices" is an understatement. Their choices led to the death of someone.
Click to expand...

We have precedent here on an old VN thread. The old guy who yelled at the lady for parking in the handicap spot was pushed to the ground. Then he drew, shot, and killed. He was charged and convicted with manslaughter even though he didn't start the violence. He started the conflict and was armed, and thus held to the high standard that comes with being armed. You can't just go around with your chest out and then act like you didn't do anything wrong when you pull the trigger. This is manslaughter
 
Last edited:
#940
#940
Weezer said:
That's ONE way of looking at it. You could also think, "gee, if they were only wanting to talk, why did the one that chose to approach him feel the need to bring his shotgun to begin with?" Their actions were clearly negligent, and ignorance is not an excuse in a court of law. Those negligent actions clearly led to a man being dead. He'd be alive if not for a weapon to even wrestle over. The dad in the bed of the truck had a gun. He could easily have provided protection for his son without the son feeling the need to approach with shotgun in hand. To say the two men made "bad choices" is an understatement. Their choices led to the death of someone.
Click to expand...
This we can agree on, i wish we had FULL video of the encounter from the perspective of the the front of the vehicle and hear the exact words the son was saying.

To me if he was saying, "get over here a**hole, i'm going to shoot you" vs. "hey man, we called the police, stop and talk to us now" is a very different response
 
#941
#941
Rickyvol77 said:
I have stated if there is evidence that the two guys pointed their guns at the suspect before hand or stated something along the lines of "stop or ill shoot you", i would feel there is more legal debate to be had. If the suspect had a gun, and stated he felt threatened and shot at them, then i feel his articulation of facts and what happened leads it to be much more up in the air.

The problem is there is NO evidence of actual pointing the gun or making threats towards the guy, their intent was clearly to try to identify/detain as they were stating as two different people called 911 on the incident to get police there.

If the suspect had been running away and the guy shot him, i'd say YEP 100% manslaughter easily.

The shooting happened solely because the suspect turned and ran back towards them and physically attacked the son and tried to steal his gun. This changed the entire encounter from two idiots being idiots to a true life and death situation.
Click to expand...
That's reasonable. The point I'm getting at is we both know that, in this hypotheitcal scenario, lethal force would have been 100% justified had the runner been armed. I'm sure you would agree since you have shared with the forum in great detail all the ways a seemingly unthreatening individual could be an imminent danger. Since these guys, in real life, approached the runner wielding guns, I think it's reasonable to consider their actions as an assault on the runner before any shots were fired. So if we can justify the use of lethal force by the runner in this hypotheitcal, I'm having a hard time seeing how these real life guys are not at fault for the runner's death.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Vol376 and Rickyvol77
#942
#942
n_huffhines said:
Oh look, Ricky has the same dumb*** retort as @hog88
Click to expand...

My original post that Dink tried to blow up was about the Martin/Zimmerman fiasco not the incident in GA. You should read it and try to make an intelligent (yeah I know not something normal for you) rebuttal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#943
#943
Rickyvol77 said:
the unarmed man is dead because he chose to attack a guy and try to steal his gun and EITHER the son shot him in self-defense OR the gun went off during the struggle
Click to expand...

That may or may not be true. The people who claim Amhad did the attacking have a dog in the hunt. As in being charged with murder or manslaughter. Anyway it's been investigated by the GBI and is evidently going to be presented to a GJ. I'm good with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purple Tiger and Rickyvol77
#945
#945
n_huffhines said:
We have precedent here on an old VN thread. The old guy who yelled at the lady for parking in the handicap spot was pushed to the ground. Then he drew, shot, and killed. He was charged with manslaughter even though he didn't start the violence. He started the conflict and was armed, and thus held to the high standard that comes with being armed. You can't just go around with your chest out and then act like you didn't do anything wrong when you pull the trigger. This is manslaughter
Click to expand...
Not every case is the same. That guy got convicted because the other guy was backing away from him after pushing him down AND because he had a history of road rage issues.
 
#946
#946
Rickyvol77 said:
That doesnt mean they pointed guns at the guy, and there is NO EVIDENCE that they did
Click to expand...

In industry, if a person gets on a powered lift, such as scissor lifts, OSHA considers the intent is to elevate that lift and the law requires that employee to wear a safety harness and life line connected to the lift. Even if the lift has not been raised, if you are in the platform, you're intent is considered to use the lift and you must strap in or be in violation.

If you approach and individual with a gun in hand, whether you point the gun at the individual or not, your intent will be considered to use that gun. If your intent is to NOT use a gun toward another, DON'T strap it on. The entire premise of brandishing a firearm at another person is to instill fear and intimidation. If it goes awry, it's your fault. There's that old saying, if you ain't gonna pull the trigger, don't draw the weapon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Vol376
#947
#947
Chris4Vols22 said:
That's reasonable. The point I'm getting at is we both know that, in this hypotheitcal scenario, lethal force would have been 100% justified had the runner been armed. I'm sure you would agree since you have shared with the forum in great detail all the ways a seemingly unthreatening individual could be an imminent danger. Since these guys, in real life, approached the runner wielding guns, I think it's reasonable to consider their actions as an assault on the runner before any shots were fired. So if we can justify the use of lethal force by the runner in this hypotheitcal, I'm having a hard time seeing how these real life guys are not at fault for the runner's death.
Click to expand...

Everything except the bolded part i can agree with. It's not an assault to merely possess firearms unless there is direct evidence that you were pointing them at someone or verbally threatened to use them. Georgia law on self-defense is pretty clear on this. It's a lot harder to argue self-defense for the suspect since he had the opportunity to run away still.

Some would argue he thought he was "trapped" but no court can take into evidence a hypothesis of what someone "may have" been feeling
 
#948
#948
Rickyvol77 said:
This we can agree on, i wish we had FULL video of the encounter from the perspective of the the front of the vehicle and hear the exact words the son was saying.

To me if he was saying, "get over here a**hole, i'm going to shoot you" vs. "hey man, we called the police, stop and talk to us now" is a very different response
Click to expand...
It would also be very different if he said "we want to talk" without gun in hand. If someone approaches me, gun in hand, I'm not even thinking about what they're saying necessarily. I'm immediately on alert and feeling threatened. I think anyone would be. I think the man who was killed had every right to feel threatened for his life, which is why I don't buy a self-defense argument for the shooter. He brought the gun to the fight and approached the deceased with no authority to do so. If they were "just trying to help the police" they could have simply followed. They had NO authority to detain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Vol376
#949
#949
Rickyvol77 said:
Everything except the bolded part i can agree with. It's not an assault to merely possess firearms unless there is direct evidence that you were pointing them at someone or verbally threatened to use them. Georgia law on self-defense is pretty clear on this. It's a lot harder to argue self-defense for the suspect since he had the opportunity to run away still.

Some would argue he thought he was "trapped" but no court can take into evidence a hypothesis of what someone "may have" been feeling
Click to expand...
Isn't the entire premise of lethal self defense is that it's justified if you FEEL like your life is in imminent danger?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purple Tiger
#950
#950
Hunerwadel said:
That may or may not be true. The people who claim Ahmad did the attacking have a dog in the hunt. As in being charged with murder or manslaughter. Anyway it's been investigated by the GBI and is evidently going to be presented to a GJ. I'm good with that.
Click to expand...
Well they don't have to "claim" Amhad did the attacking because he 100% clear as day did on that video. We both agree that a Grand Jury to mull the facts is the best scenario.
I truly don't believe the evidence supports that the two men set out to shoot and kill him, i do believe they thought he would stop and they would detain him till police arrived.

I think Ahmad's family suing them in civil court for money is the way to go rather than criminal charges (at least murder charges instead of reckless endangerment, false imprisonment type charges)
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top