- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Alleged video of Ahmaud Arbery shooting leaks
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:03 am to OysterPoBoy
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:03 am to OysterPoBoy
quote:
Was he even hit by the first shot?
It looked like he may have been bleeding prior to the 2nd shot but I can't tell for 100% sure.
0
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:04 am to BluegrassBelle
quote:
You're speculating that because the victim, by rumor, was popped for having an illegal gun once that he committed a crime that would allow for these men to kill him in a "citizen's arrest" and that he was armed when it happened.
Oh Jesus Christ.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:05 am to OysterPoBoy
quote:
It’s hard to tell from the video but are they fighting for the gun when the first shot goes off? Was he even hit by the first shot? Do they say how many times he was shot?
The first shot pretty clearly goes off on the video before the victim physically confronts anyone. There are three shots on the video.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:06 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
OK.
At this point intent is going to be driven by whoever has the best lawyer....the defense or the state.
The only facts we know are that two guys pulled up behind an unarmed black guy, one got out of the truck, a struggle ensued, and the black got was shot and died of a GSW.
The facts after that like I said will be driven by whoever has the best attorney.....in my mind a pretty weak DA or assistant DA should be able to drive this case fairly easily with the only hiccup being the "thin blue line"
This post was edited on 5/7/20 at 8:07 am
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:07 am to OysterPoBoy
quote:
It’s hard to tell from the video but are they fighting for the gun when the first shot goes off? Was he even hit by the first shot? Do they say how many times he was shot?
The only one that obviously hit him was the 3rd shot
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:09 am to BluegrassBelle
quote:
The first shot pretty clearly goes off on the video before the victim physically confronts anyone
So he goes around the truck and then is shot. Then struggles with the guy and is shot two more times?
Why does the camera always miss the key moments or get wobbly right when you need it?
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:09 am to Diseasefreeforall
I don't know all the Georgia laws, but I'm leaning towards getting these guys on manslaughter charges.
The guy killed was a POS. He was arrested for trying to bring a gun into a school gym and was also arrested for shoplifting. He has a history of being a POS, so he probably wasn't a jogger out for a nice run.
I think the white guys overstepped and it lead to this black guy's death. I just want to know why there was a car filming the black guy running. If he was caught trying to steal something then I would lean towards manslaughter, If he was just running and they thought he might be the guy because he was black then definitely murder 2.
So many unanswered questions at this point.
The guy killed was a POS. He was arrested for trying to bring a gun into a school gym and was also arrested for shoplifting. He has a history of being a POS, so he probably wasn't a jogger out for a nice run.
I think the white guys overstepped and it lead to this black guy's death. I just want to know why there was a car filming the black guy running. If he was caught trying to steal something then I would lean towards manslaughter, If he was just running and they thought he might be the guy because he was black then definitely murder 2.
So many unanswered questions at this point.
This post was edited on 5/7/20 at 8:12 am
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:10 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Oh Jesus Christ.
I supported the police in most of the cases where they have had to use deadly force recently including the case in BR.
The difference here is that these guys have a clear and easy decision they could have made....don't engage the person. Police usually don't have that choice...it is their job to engage. That will play a factor in this case.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:14 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
But with ALL of these situations, I always ask, ‘did the perpetrators shoot the guy BECAUSE he was black? Or did he shoot him for another reason and the guy just happened to be black?’
This certain situation may be a bad example, I’m not sure. But I don’t understand why it always has to be a white vs black type of deal
They may have not shot him because he was black. But they sure as hell grabbed their weapons and made up their mind to go perform a citizen's arrest. They assumed he was a criminal and a burglar. Why did they do that? Because he was a black guy running through their neighborhood that they didnt know.
They figured he was a criminal because he was black. And them being wannabe cops figured they would do their community a huge service by making sure this black criminal was off the streets.
They may have not went up there for the sole reason of shooting him. But they ambushed him in the middle of the street because he was black. Seeing as how they already had their guns pulled out and ready, they was not opposed to the idea of shooting him either.
They had no means of letting him escape, whether that meant holding him hostage at gunpoint, or shooting him so that he could not continue moving.
Did they shoot him for being black? Technically maybe not. But they did stop him for being black, and proceeded to shoot him. So close fricking enough for me.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:16 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Oh Jesus Christ.
I mean, you are. You're throwing out "Well I heard...".
But lets go past speculation. Georgia's citizen's arrest law is stated as such:
quote:
A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.
So we have two issues here regarding their and your defense of their actions with a "citizen's arrest":
- They (the shooters) admitted that they did not see him commit a crime. They didn't see him in the act of anything. They were only going by what a neighbor showed them from a video. They assumed the guy running down the road was the one they saw in the previous video. That doesn't hold up in citizen's arrest by the language above.
- Simple trespassing in Georgia isn't a felony. Looking in a property window isn't a felony (which is what he was reported as doing). There is no locked doors on that property because it wasn't close to finished so that doesn't pass the felony trespassing muster. There was no report of $500+ damage to the property at the hands of the victim, so that doesn't pass the felony trespassing muster.
The guy could be the biggest POS on the planet. That doesn't matter here. You can't just hunt people down and kill them because they're a POS.
This post was edited on 5/7/20 at 8:18 am
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:16 am to Tri City Tigers
quote:
The guy killed was a POS. He was arrested for trying to bring a gun into a school gym and was also arrested for shoplifting. He has a history of being a POS, so he probably wasn't a jogger out for a nice run.
Irrelevant. The shooters didn’t know him prior to the shooting, so his past transgressions are not a justifiable reason to kill him. I’ve heard nothing from this story that says they were justified in shooting him. Need to arrest the pos shooters immediately. Its gross that people here are defending this.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:17 am to QJenk
quote:
Because he was a black guy running through their neighborhood that they didnt know.
Maybe. Maybe not.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:18 am to QJenk
Completely agree. Also, it’s insane that these guys thinking that chasing someone who was running, in a truck and with guns, is going to convince them to “stop and just talk”. Like really? Probably made the dude run faster. It’s like asking for him to not cooperate with your bs.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:18 am to jordan21210
quote:
Irrelevant. The shooters didn’t know him prior to the shooting, so his past transgressions are not a justifiable reason to kill him. I’ve heard nothing from this story that says they were justified in shooting him. Need to arrest the pos shooters immediately. Its gross that people here are defending thi
It's not necessarily irrelevant. Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:19 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Maybe. Maybe not.
Are you arguing that they knew the guy? I mean it's pretty well a fact that he was black and running through their neighborhood....did they state that they knew the guy?
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:20 am to Tri City Tigers
quote:
The guy killed was a POS. He was arrested for trying to bring a gun into a school gym and was also arrested for shoplifting. He has a history of being a POS, so he probably wasn't a jogger out for a nice run.
What in the world
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:21 am to BluegrassBelle
Immediate knowledge might fit the definition. And how are they suppose to know simple trespassing isn't a felony?
That's a pretty vague law and a good lawyer will be able to use it to their advantage. Obviously I'm not justifying what they did.
That's a pretty vague law and a good lawyer will be able to use it to their advantage. Obviously I'm not justifying what they did.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:21 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
It's not necessarily irrelevant.
It’s completely irrelevant to the shooting - again, the shooters did not know who he was.
His history only becomes relevant by the shooters defense team after the man is dead already and can’t defend himself.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:21 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
It's not necessarily irrelevant.
Depending on the judge it will most likely be irrelevant at trial.....but there is no doubt the defense will bring it up and make the judge rule on it.
BUT in my opinion it is irrelevant now and will be at trial as well.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:21 am to jordan21210
quote:
Irrelevant. The shooters didn’t know him prior to the shooting, so his past transgressions are not a justifiable reason to kill him. I’ve heard nothing from this story that says they were justified in shooting him. Need to arrest the pos shooters immediately.
It is relevant. If it can be proven that he was in the neighborhood to steal.
quote:
Its gross that people here are defending this.
I'm not defending those guys. I already said they should have charges of manslaughter or murder 2.
Page 29 of 58
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News