Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Ahmaud Arbery murder trial.............


mr6666
 Share

Recommended Posts

"Nearly two years after the fatal shooting of 25-year-old Black man Ahmaud Arbery in Georgia, opening arguments in the trial of the white men accused of chasing and murdering him on the street began Friday morning.

Prosecutors wasted no time in framing the case as one centered on “assumptions and driveway decisions” by wannabe vigilantes who in fact were assailants, one of whom allegedly told Arbery, “Stop, or I’ll blow your **** head off.”

What is not in dispute is that ex-cop Gregory McMichael, his son Travis McMichael, and William “Roddie” Bryan chased Arbery, who was known to jog in the area, in Satilla Shores, a neighborhood in Brunswick, Georgia, on the afternoon of Feb. 23, 2020. Travis McMichael is caught on a video filmed by Bryan firing the fatal shots. ...........

According to Senior Assistant District Attorney Linda Dunikoski, on the day of the shooting, the McMichaels and their neighbor chased Arbery for five minutes before the shots were fired. She took pains early on to bat away expected arguments by the defense team that the trio were trying to engage Arbery in a citizen’s arrest in connection with suspected break-ins in the area......

https://www.thedailybeast.com/ahmaud-arbery-murdered-in-cold-blood-by-travis-mcmichael-gregory-mcmichael-prosecutors-say?via=twitter_page

:unsure:

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things debated is allowing the photo of his truck having the Confederate symbol which were incorporated within the old Georgia state flag.  Defense arguing it's inflammatory, could have a point since having the old Georgia state flag still attached is no big deal within itself.

https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/crime/ahmaud-arbery/gregory-mcmichael-travis-mcmichael-william-roddie-bryan-accused-amaud-arbery-killers-want-confederate-emblem-license-plate-banned-from-trial/77-5c022365-6a8d-41cf-9ad2-521d41a08962

 

e55be2b6-1f60-443a-8e28-51b0af44ddd9_192

maxresdefault.jpg

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trial of the three men held responsible for the death of the "Georgia jogger" started .  I'll admit I haven't been following it closely, but was a bit aghast at the defense position that one of the men charged had a "duty" to protect that neighborhood from any danger HE  perceived.  :blink:

Any thought s on any of what's gone on so far?

Sepiatone

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Sepiatone said:

The trial of the three men held responsible for the death of the "Georgia jogger" started .  I'll admit I haven't been following it closely, but was a bit aghast at the defense position that one of the men charged had a "duty" to protect that neighborhood from any danger HE  perceived.  :blink:

Any thought s on any of what's gone on so far?

Sepiatone

Georgia still has old laws on the books that give citizens a lot of rights to perform their "duty" to protect their neighborhood.     These laws were established by white men to ensure they could legally protect their property against blacks.         So the defense is correct in that regard (as it relates to the laws for citizen action and arrest against fellow citizens).

Thus the focus of the case is if these three men acted within the sprit of those old laws.     Based on what I have read they did NOT.   

There is also the question of if the state will retire some of these old laws.     

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, hamradio said:

Was it on the first page? Some people have been very busy making dozens of pointless threads, pushing everything into the back pages, and most people aren't interested in sorting through them all.

I'd cut him some slack.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Was it on the first page? Some people have been very busy making dozens of pointless threads, pushing everything into the back pages, and most people aren't interested in sorting through them all.

I'd cut him some slack.

It was on page 2 at the time of my posting,

Wish the moderator either consolidate or remove the way too many Biden and Trump threads.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/6/2021 at 12:55 PM, JamesJazGuitar said:

Georgia still has old laws on the books that give citizens a lot of rights to perform their "duty" to protect their neighborhood.     These laws were established by white men to ensure they could legally protect their property against blacks.         So the defense is correct in that regard (as it relates to the laws for citizen action and arrest against fellow citizens).

Thus the focus of the case is if these three men acted within the sprit of those old laws.     Based on what I have read they did NOT.   

There is also the question of if the state will retire some of these old laws.     

 

 

The old law permitting citizens broad latitude to protect themselves and neighborhoods has been repealed, but it was in force at the time of the incident.  Passed by a Republican legislature and signed by a Republican governor.

Since this incident, Georgia has also passed a hate crime law that would have been applicable to this situation.

Whatever happens here, the Federal government is pursuing hate crime prosecutions of the three.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ElCid said:

The old law permitting citizens broad latitude to protect themselves and neighborhoods has been repealed, but it was in force at the time of the incident.  Passed by a Republican legislature and signed by a Republican governor.

Since this incident, Georgia has also passed a hate crime law that would have been applicable to this situation.

Whatever happens here, the Federal government is pursuing hate crime prosecutions of the three.

Wasn't the repeal also done by a Republican legislature and signed by a Republican governor (as well as the new hate crime law)?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, JamesJazGuitar said:

Wasn't the repeal also done by a Republican legislature and signed by a Republican governor (as well as the new hate crime law)?

 

 

Must have confused you.  I meant that the Republican legislature and governor passed both the repeal of the previous "self'defense" law and passed the hate crime law. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Did you see the expression on his co-counsel's face when he said that? Priceless.

FD72bOaWUAU_t5t?format=jpg&name=small   FD78mn0XIAQHV_u?format=jpg&name=360x360

Yea,  that was priceless.    But I don't think this defense attorney did anything wrong since he didn't make the request in front of the jury.

E.g.  If Obama or Harris or some other very high profile person-of-color was to attend that could disrupt the proceedings and influence the jury against the defendants,  and that could lead to the defense overturning a conviction upon appeal.

Unlike countries like Russia,  Iran, China etc.  the US system does lean towards protecting the rights of the defendant over that of the state.

So even the right to a fair trial for racist scum like the 3 defendants  need to be protected. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Vautrin said:

If I was the defense  lawyer with a jury of 11 white folks I'd  want Al and Jesse in the courtroom every day, sitting in the front

row and giving each  other high  fives. 

The serious point you're making is that one shouldn't assume which way a white juror will react to having people like Al and Jesse in the courtroom;

Which emotional reaction will take place?    white-guilt that would lean a juror more towards a conviction or those-activist-complain-too-much-when-their-people-deserve-what-they-get which would lean a juror towards not-guilty?

Of course in theory who is siting in the courtroom should have no impact on a juror, but in these high-profile cases that is likely to be BS.

PS:  according to CNN now more than 100s black pastors are going to the trial.       I don't know how many,  if any, will be let into the courtroom.

Either way,   doesn't this just help the defense?   E.g. increase their changes of winning an appeal if convicted? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JamesJazGuitar said:

The serious point you're making is that one shouldn't assume which way a white juror will react to having people like Al and Jesse in the courtroom;

Which emotional reaction will take place?    white-guilt that would lean a juror more towards a conviction or those-activist-complain-too-much-when-their-people-deserve-what-they-get which would lean a juror towards not-guilty?

Of course in theory who is siting in the courtroom should have no impact on a juror, but in these high-profile cases that is likely to be BS.

PS:  according to CNN now more than 100s black pastors are going to the trial.       I don't know how many,  if any, will be let into the courtroom.

Either way,   doesn't this just help the defense?   E.g. increase their changes of winning an appeal if convicted? 

My point  was mostly facetious, presuming that  white jurors wouldn't look kindly on seeing  Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson  in attendance,

though  I   guess one  day wouldn't hurt.  I  believe the 100 black pastors will be holding some kind of vigil or meeting outside  the  courthouse

and likely not be seated  in the courtroom. Sure, this might be  a matter for appeal, though I don't think it  has much chance  of success. I lived

in Georgia for several  years  and  I'm sure it's better  than it used to be in matters of race. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

My point  was mostly facetious, presuming that  white jurors wouldn't look kindly on seeing  Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson  in attendance,

though  I   guess one  day wouldn't hurt.  I  believe the 100 black pastors will be holding some kind of vigil or meeting outside  the  courthouse

and likely not be seated  in the courtroom. Sure, this might be  a matter for appeal, though I don't think it  has much chance  of success. I lived

in Georgia for several  years  and  I'm sure it's better  than it used to be in matters of race. 

11 white jurors from South Georgia will very likely result in acquittal or hung jury.  Some of them to feel pressured because of the Black ministers and such will only heighten likelihood of this happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, ElCid said:

11 white jurors from South Georgia will very likely result in acquittal or hung jury.  Some of them to feel pressured because of the Black ministers and such will only heighten likelihood of this happening.

That  would be  my first guess, but I'm  not totally  sure about that.  They may come back with a guilty  verdict. Guess we'll know

not too long  from now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...