- 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 8:33 am to FLBooGoTigs1
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:33 am to FLBooGoTigs1
quote:
You nor I know exactly what happened nor the history of these people or the guy that was shot.
His criminal history doesn't matter in citizen's arrest statute unless the history is the men witnessed him committing a felony crime. They admitted in the police report/interview that they did not see him, nor had knowledge, of him committing a felony crime. That we know from what has been released (even not on "liberal media").
His previous arrest record or time served doesn't just automatically make him eligible for a citizen's arrest. It's irrelevant here. Even with that vague language, you can't engage in a citizen's arrest because someone is jogging through your neighborhood who happens to have a record.
0
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:34 am to FLBooGoTigs1
quote:
You say don't bring up the victims past but maybe this poor innocent victim wasn't so innocent
By this logic, you’d be legally justified to walk into a 9th ward housing project and kill at random. Some of y’all are batshit crazy.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:34 am to The Pirate King
quote:
The first shot wasn’t fired until he rushed the shooter, then the second and third were fired while they were struggling over the gun.
The first shot was fired before there was any physical engagement. Rewatch the video. He was still jogging when the first shot was fired.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:35 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
That literally has nothing to do with what I said
I was just chiming in. I may have replied to you because your comment was the most recent. Not really replying to you.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:35 am to BluegrassBelle
Georgia Self Defense law:
quote:
O.C.G.A. 16-3-21 states that:
(a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other´s imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to
prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(b) A person is not justified in using force under the circumstances specified in subsection (a) of this Code section if he:
(1) Initially provokes the use of force against himself with the intent to use such force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm
upon the assailant;
(2) Is attempting to commit, committing, or fleeing after the commission or attempted commission of a felony; or
(3) Was the aggressor or was engaged in a combat by agreement unless he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to such other person his intent to do so and the other, notwithstanding, continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful force.
(c) Any rule, regulation, or policy of any agency of the state or any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, or policy of any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state which is in conflict with this Code section shall be null, void, and of no force and effect.
(d) In a prosecution for murder or manslaughter, if a defendant raises as a defense a justification provided by subsection
(a) of this Code section, the defendant, in order to establish the defendant´s reasonable belief that the use of force or deadly force was immediately necessary, may be permitted to offer:
(1) Relevant evidence that the defendant had been the victim of acts of family violence or child abuse committed by the deceased, as such acts are described in Code Sections 19-13-1 and 19-15-1, respectively; and
(2) Relevant expert testimony regarding the condition of the mind of the defendant at the time of the offense, including those relevant facts and circumstances relating to the family violence or child abuse that are the bases of the expert´s
opinion.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:36 am to jordan21210
Will they be able to enhance the audio enough to hear what was said before the shooting? I thought I heard shouting but not sure.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:38 am to The Pirate King
quote:
The basics of the shooting are the same
No, they aren't. It's not even close. Do you even know what transpired in the Zimmerman case.
quote:
The first shot wasn’t fired until he rushed the shooter, then the second and third were fired while they were struggling over the gun.
That's not what the video shows.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:38 am to Antonio Moss
I don't believe they're arguing the self-defense law (I could be wrong) because this:
The shooters fired the first shot before the victim physically engaged the man just outside of the truck. I think the first shot may have come from the Dad in the truck bed. But there was definitely a first shot before anything else went down and that would negate their self-defense argument. They also hopped in their trucks, armed, with the intent to pursue the victim before any physical altercation happened.
ETA: I believe that's why they're instead using the citizen's arrest argument and arguing they were in the middle of a citizen's arrest instead.
quote:
(b) A person is not justified in using force under the circumstances specified in subsection (a) of this Code section if he:
(1) Initially provokes the use of force against himself with the intent to use such force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm
upon the assailant;
The shooters fired the first shot before the victim physically engaged the man just outside of the truck. I think the first shot may have come from the Dad in the truck bed. But there was definitely a first shot before anything else went down and that would negate their self-defense argument. They also hopped in their trucks, armed, with the intent to pursue the victim before any physical altercation happened.
ETA: I believe that's why they're instead using the citizen's arrest argument and arguing they were in the middle of a citizen's arrest instead.
This post was edited on 5/7/20 at 8:40 am
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:38 am to OysterPoBoy
You know when I see something like this it always reminds me of this lyric
"Whatever happened to catchin a good old fashioned passionate arse whoopin?....Whatever happened to havin your shoes, coat, and your hat tookin?"
"Whatever happened to catchin a good old fashioned passionate arse whoopin?....Whatever happened to havin your shoes, coat, and your hat tookin?"
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:39 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
And how is character relevant?
You don't get to attack character in the courtroom unless it is material.
This isn't a courtroom.
I don't think the guy was just out for a jog. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he was.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:39 am to LSU316
Damn i just watched this. In broad daylight? They straight up murdered his arse. How about call the cops if he is suspicious? wow.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:40 am to BluegrassBelle
quote:
That's not what the video shows.
quote:
I think the first shot may have come from the Dad in the truck bed.
That's not what I'm seeing...I'm not saying ya'll are wrong but what I'm seeing is the guy that shoots the first shot is in front of the truck and it almost looks like the guys rounds off toward the shooter when he passes the front of the truck.....tell me what you see?
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:41 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
This isn't a courtroom.
I don't think the guy was just out for a jog. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he was.
Even if he wasn't just out for a jog and was peeping some construction site, that still doesn't justify gunning him down in the street.
This post was edited on 5/7/20 at 8:42 am
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:41 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
The first shot wasn’t fired until he rushed the shooter, then the second and third were fired while they were struggling over the gun.
That's not what the video shows.
I couldn’t see what was happening at the exact moment the first shot was fired. That’s the problem. If the runner shouted “I’m gonna take that gun from you and shoot you in the head” and then charged at him it would be a different story then if the shooter just shot him when he ran around the truck trying to get away.
I can’t tell.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:41 am to The Pirate King
quote:
The basics of the shooting are the same and will be the same reason these guys don’t get a murder charge.
Not really, I am not big city lawyer but if you can claim stand your ground in this case then the law needs to be tossed out.
Two armed guys road blocking a runner. One in an elevated position. If anyone is standing their ground it’s the victim
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:41 am to bushwacker
quote:
How about call the cops if he is suspicious? wow.
Novel idea I know....real progressive
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:41 am to BluegrassBelle
quote:
The first shot was fired before there was any physical engagement. Rewatch the video. He was still jogging when the first shot was fired.
The first shot was taken when he goes around the truck and turns hard left to rush the shooter. First shot struck him in the hand. The fatal shots weren’t fired until there was a struggle over the gun. How can you convict someone of murder when the fatal shots were fired while two people are fighting over a gun?
Btw I’m 100% in agreement that this was an 100% avoidable situation and these guys were profiling, racist, whatever.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:41 am to BluegrassBelle
Georgia Citizen's Arrest statute:
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.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:42 am to Mo Jeaux
This citizens arrest law is curious to me
So if I see someone jogging in my neighborhood, I can harass him under the guise that there were a few car break-ins recently?
Like I can physically go after him and frick with him even if I've seen him do nothing and have no evidence of him doing anything.
So if I see someone jogging in my neighborhood, I can harass him under the guise that there were a few car break-ins recently?
Like I can physically go after him and frick with him even if I've seen him do nothing and have no evidence of him doing anything.
Posted on 5/7/20 at 8:42 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
This isn't a courtroom.
The discussion reloves around the legal consequences of this action.
quote:
I don't think the guy was just out for a jog. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he was.
Won't matter
Page 31 of 58
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News