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

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


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, mr6666 said:

:unsure:

This trial should be different from the Rittenhouse one in at least one respect.  Rittenhouse had a $2 Million legal defense fund and his attorneys even had two mock trials before people certified as eligible for jury membership in WI.   They had two mock sessions where Rittenhouse was on stand and one where he was not.  Doubt the defendants in this trial will have access to that much money.   But you never know.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, mr6666 said:

:unsure:

there is no video of the actual killing. arbery was trying to pull McMichael's gun from him and was scared sheetless that arbery would slay him with his own gun so he acted in self-defense of his own life.

 

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NipkowDisc said:

there is no video of the actual killing. arbery was trying to pull McMichael's gun from him and was scared sheetless that arbery would slay him with his own gun so he acted in self-defense of his own life.

 

Yes, why would Arberry fear for his life? Just because he was chased for five minutes  by two men in a truck, both  armed and one telling him

he would blow his mfing  head off if he moved. 

  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NipkowDisc said:

there is no video of the actual killing. arbery was trying to pull McMichael's gun from him and was scared sheetless that arbery would slay him with his own gun so he acted in self-defense of his own life.

 

Travis McMichael's whole story is unraveling on cross-examination. Now he's admitting that Ahmaud Arbery never pulled a weapon and never threatened him -- and that he "honestly cannot remember" if Arbery had a hold of McMichael's gun before McMichael shot him.
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

Yes, why would Arberry fear for his life? Just because he was chased for five minutes  by two men in a truck, both  armed and one telling him

he would blow his mfing  head off if he moved. 

Clearly Arbery feared for his life but that doesn't give one legal justification to attack the people they were afraid of.

The law in GA  allowed for private citizens to make detain people they believe may have committed a crime.   The law doesn't allow for the suspect to fight-back using a claim of self-defense.        That law has since been retired but it is likely to lead to an acquittal.

  

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, JamesJazGuitar said:

Clearly Arbery feared for his life but that doesn't give one legal justification to attack the people they were afraid of.

The law in GA  allowed for private citizens to make detain people they believe may have committed a crime.   The law doesn't allow for the suspect to fight-back using a claim of self-defense.        That law has since been retired but it is likely to lead to an acquittal.

  

Maybe he didn't trust these dopes not to shoot him in the back  if  he tried to keep running. And, as the prosecutor  pointed out, they had  no

evidence that Arberry had  committed  a crime, and  thus no reason to  effect a citizen's arrest, or  perhaps in their case,  a citizen's  council

arrest.  Perhaps  they  were frightened  of Arberry's dirty long toenails. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vautrin said:

Maybe he didn't trust these dopes not to shoot him in the back  if  he tried to keep running. And, as the prosecutor  pointed out, they had  no

evidence that Arberry had  committed  a crime, and  thus no reason to  effect a citizen's arrest, or  perhaps in their case,  a citizen's  council

arrest.  Perhaps  they  were frightened  of Arberry's dirty long toenails. 

All of that may be true but Arbery can't testify to any of that.         If one is going to use the self-defense defense it pays to ensure there are no witness that can state otherwise.

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JamesJazGuitar said:

All of that may be true but Arbery can't testify to any of that.         If one is going to use the self-defense defense it pays to ensure there are no witness that can state otherwise.

 

 

Yes, it is an advantage to have the person you killed  be unable to challenge any of your  testimony. One of the points the prosecutor made in her

closing  argument  was  that there  are  some instances in which self-defense can't be used as a legally legitimate reason for killing someone, as

when the person claiming self defense is the aggressor. which  she said Travis was. I guess  if you're pointing a shotgun at somebody that might

be an aggressive  action. One of the defense attorneys said Arbery was not unarmed, he had  his  fists, so I suppose  all of us are armed at

all times. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Vautrin said:

Yes, it is an advantage to have the person you killed  be unable to challenge any of your  testimony. One of the points the prosecutor made in her

closing  argument  was  that there  are  some instances in which self-defense can't be used as a legally legitimate reason for killing someone, as

when the person claiming self defense is the aggressor. which  she said Travis was. I guess  if you're pointing a shotgun at somebody that might

be an aggressive  action. One of the defense attorneys said Arbery was not unarmed, he had  his  fists, so I suppose  all of us are armed at

all times. 

Zimmerman was able to shoot and kill an unarmed teen,  and was found not-guilty,   that was smaller than he was,   but better with his fists.

 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How many people in any state would cooperate if two armed men who have been chasing them finally get them cornered and say "I am making a citizens arrest because I think you committed a crime?"   Now factor in that you are black and in south Georgia and the armed men are white.   By chasers making the citizens arrest statement, the victim no longer has a right to self-defense?  Did the chasers call the police during the chase?  If not, how can they be claiming to be pursuing someone in order to make a citizens arrest?

What would happen if three black men in pick-ups chased a white man and the white man ended up dead?

It is good that GA has repealed its citizens arrest law.  Every state needs to do away with these and stand your ground laws.   On stand your ground, could just become much more restrictive than some states - such as FL.

Of course, the jury has an out if they choose to find a way to acquit the three.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ElCid said:

How many people in any state would cooperate if two armed men who have been chasing them finally get them cornered and say "I am making a citizens arrest because I think you committed a crime?"   Now factor in that you are black and in south Georgia and the armed men are white.   By chasers making the citizens arrest statement, the victim no longer has a right to self-defense?  Did the chasers call the police during the chase?  If not, how can they be claiming to be pursuing someone in order to make a citizens arrest?

What would happen if three black men in pick-ups chased a white man and the white man ended up dead?

It is good that GA has repealed its citizens arrest law.  Every state needs to do away with these and stand your ground laws.   On stand your ground, could just become much more restrictive than some states - such as FL.

Of course, the jury has an out if they choose to find a way to acquit the three.

All 3 convicted.    I do wonder if the defense was able to advise the jury that the citizen arrest law was repealed,  since most of their case is based on the 3 saying they were just applying that law.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JamesJazGuitar said:

Zimmerman was able to shoot and kill an unarmed teen,  and was found not-guilty,   that was smaller than he was,   but better with his fists.

 

Whatever happened  to that scumbag? Don't  hear too much  about him any more, but  it has been  a while since the trial.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bryan got  screwed. I would not have found him guilty  of  any of  the murder  charges, but guilty  of some  of  the lesser

charges. In  general I don't like laws  that punish everyone for the act of just one of the participants. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

I think Bryan got  screwed. I would not have found him guilty  of  any of  the murder  charges, but guilty  of some  of  the lesser

charges. In  general I don't like laws  that punish everyone for the act of just one of the participants. 

I didn't watch the trial but I think perhaps he was more directly involved in trapping the victim than has been widely reported.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Bogie56 said:

I didn't watch the trial but I think perhaps he was more directly involved in trapping the victim than has been widely reported.

That is  a distinct possibility, but  I still  don't think he was guilty of  murder.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JamesJazGuitar said:

All 3 convicted.    I do wonder if the defense was able to advise the jury that the citizen arrest law was repealed,  since most of their case is based on the 3 saying they were just applying that law.   

What difference would it have made.  In fact, by stating that the law was so bad it had to be repealed would have made their defense even weaker.

28 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

That is  a distinct possibility, but  I still  don't think he was guilty of  murder.

Re: Bryan, they were all three convicted of "felony murder."  Not sure how that is actually defined, but probably lesser than old first degree murder.  He was involved and told the police that he had "cornered" Aubry a couple of times and otherwise prevented his escape. 

You may not agree with it, but I believe the standard in most states is that if you participate in a crime and a murder occurs, you are potentially a guilty as the person who pulled the trigger.

Bryan did not have to  be there, he did not have to corner Aubry and he did nothing to prevent his being murdered.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
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
© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...