- 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
2
Posted on 5/10/20 at 12:05 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
And pointing guns at you.
We didn't see that in the video, all we see is them fighting for a gun once he rounded the truck and the camera caught up.
It's just like claiming Ahmaud initiated the physical contact.
We don't know, what happened for those few seconds where the camera was pointed at nothing and he was rounding the passenger side of the truck.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 12:07 pm to Azkiger
quote:
We don't see that, though. We see Ahmaud pushing Travis, yes, but we don't see who initiated physical contact.
All the people round here defending the McMichaels need to attempt the "shoe on the other foot" test and determine how they'd react if a couple of armed strangers accosted them to effect an unlawful citizen's arrest, these two are getting the book thrown at them in some way, it's inevitable, just need to accept it
Posted on 5/10/20 at 12:14 pm to Azkiger
quote:
We see Ahmaud pushing Travis, yes, but we don't see who initiated physical contact.
What? Are you serious? We are looking at the same video right? After the initial contact with Travis after Arbery's charge (remember Arbery initated initial PHYSICAL contact, keep that in mind) we can assume that at the moment of contact between the two men Arbery had his hands on that weapon. And the scuffle that follows is a struggle by Arbery to wrestle that weapon away and Travis' effort to prevent him from taking that weapon. A life and death struggle that ended when the weapon discharged killing the assailer.....one Ahmaud Arbery.
But anyway the democrat mayor of Atlanta has already pounced on this tragic event to accuse Donald Trump of racism. I figure the MSM media and the democrats will exploit this event to the max for political gain. They've opened up three fronts now; the Covid-19 economic lockdown, the push for Fraud by Mail, and the Ahmaud Arbery front.
Steady as she goes America.
This post was edited on 5/10/20 at 12:30 pm
Posted on 5/10/20 at 12:54 pm to RiseUpATL
The stupid mayor of Atlanta is calling it a lynching. smh
Leaders should try to unite and calm the public rather than race bait, divide and inflame.
Leaders should try to unite and calm the public rather than race bait, divide and inflame.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:07 pm to ThePTExperience1969
quote:
All the people round here defending the McMichaels need to attempt the "shoe on the other foot" test and determine how they'd react if a couple of armed strangers accosted them to effect an unlawful citizen's arrest, these two are getting the book thrown at them in some way, it's inevitable, just need to accept it
I have been trying this thought experiment. I sure as shite don't grab the barrel of a shotgun. I assume if I am in a different neighborhood I try to talk to them.
By the way Ahmaud's background seems to imply he might be a couple of standard deviations below average IQ.
Hard to find decent news on this.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:41 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
JudgeHolden
Take your racist azz somewhere else where they believe your perpetual victim hood. Judge my azz.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:42 pm to TRex
quote:
No you’re just full of shite. Period
no i’m not.
i don’t jog near often enough to have dedicated shoes to jog.
but i do have basketball shoes which is what i’d wear.
so no it’s not that fricking oddball.
dipshit.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:47 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
There is no legal scenario where McMichael is justified
Wrong.
TITLE 17 - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 4 - ARREST OF PERSONS
ARTICLE 4 - ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS
§ 17-4-60 - Grounds for arrest
O.C.G.A. 17-4-60 (2010)
17-4-60. Grounds for arrest
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.
Doesn't really matter how many people don't like the law. The law is the law.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:50 pm to Azkiger
quote:
Which is likely a legal response to two people following you and trying to block your path.
Watch the video again.
Arbery is running up to the back of white pick-up approaching it from the left.
Arbery quickly veers off to the right of the truck and makes a 90 degree turn to the front of the truck from about 20-25 ft towards McMicheals.
A struggle(tug of war) for the shotgun ensues.
Arbery swings a couple of times at McMicheals.
Now notice in the video, a section during the struggle between Arbery and McMicheals is cut out.
The video comes back in with Arbery laying on the ground.
Now I am not a conspiracy nut but something is awry when a section of a video is missing.
We know that the evil media is notorious about not presenting the whole picture when it comes to a charged incident like this.
Remember the George Zim and Trayvon Martin incident?
How about Micheal Brown incident?
How about Alton Sterling?
There was some sort of foreign object found at the scene.
According to the 911 call, Arbery was told to drop it.
Arbery was clearly the aggressor in all this.
McMicheal has good evidence that Arbery had some sort of weapon and had reasonable cause to arm himself and be ready for a potential deadly attack from Arbery
McMicheals at best will get an involuntary manslaughter charge from the grand jury.
McMicheals will probably get a hostile jury and will not get a fair trail.
quote:
This all comes down to the McMichaels witnessing Ahmad committing a felony. Outside of that them following and confronting him will be seen as being the aggressor and justify Ahmads response.
The first DA, Barnhill, stated in his report that the McMicheals [b]'hot pursuit of a burglary suspect with solid first-hand probable cause'[/b]which most likely shows that the McMicheals witnessed Arbery at the scene of the home under construction.
The lawyers for the Arbery family, Crum, put out another video of Arbery at the construction scene.
It that video, there is someone standing watching Arbery. If that proves to be the McMicheals then this case is over before it begins.
I still think the young McMicheals gets an involuntary manslaughter charge, maybe a conviction.
It will be a bone to appease the lynch mob, plus there is a national election coming up.
The DNCartel has nothing to run on except a corrupt senile sad-sack in biden.
Trump is going to get a big chunk of the black vote and this is something to stir up the blacks into voting against Trump.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:54 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
And pointing guns at you. He resisted an armed assault with non lethal force.
And he could've used lethal force since THEY WEREN'T COPS
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:55 pm to ThePTExperience1969
quote:
All the people round here defending the McMichaels need to attempt the "shoe on the other foot" test and determine how they'd react if a couple of armed strangers accosted them to effect an unlawful citizen's arrest, these two are getting the book thrown at them in some way, it's inevitable, just need to accept it
I would not have run toward them, much less around the truck to grab a shotgun and pull it toward me. I would have either turned toward the woods and run or frozen and tried to negotiate as best I could.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:56 pm to Reubaltaich
With the driver being the one disembarking the vehicle, why then did running man decide to veer right, to the passenger side?
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:56 pm to OleWar
quote:
I have been trying this thought experiment. I sure as shite don't grab the barrel of a shotgun. I assume if I am in a different neighborhood I try to talk to them.
I'm not attempting to read Arbery's mind here but, taking everything into consideration and the fact one of the McMichaels exited the car brandishing a shotgun, survival instincts for him probably kicked in
Posted on 5/10/20 at 1:58 pm to blueboxer1119
quote:
offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge.
where's the proof of that?
quote:
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.
This actually detracts from their defense because THEY HAVE TO HAVE PROBABLE CAUSE THAT A FELONY WAS COMMITTED, misdemeanor's not enough to pursue someone escaping
Posted on 5/10/20 at 2:00 pm to JudgeHolden
Looks like boots of some sort and some type of hammerish object. Are you stupid? Blind? Or just trying to start shite?
This post was edited on 5/10/20 at 2:01 pm
Posted on 5/10/20 at 2:00 pm to ThePTExperience1969
quote:
All the people round here defending the McMichaels need to attempt the "shoe on the other foot" test and determine how they'd react if a couple of armed strangers accosted them to effect an unlawful citizen's arrest, these two are getting the book thrown at them in some way, it's inevitable, just need to accept it
I don't have these issues, I'm not a thief.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 2:01 pm to ThePTExperience1969
And again, citizen arrest laws don’t offer the person making the arrest the same leeway with regards to force. The dynamic is different when the person trying to arrest you has no clear identification or authority.
There is NO scenario where a shooting was justified once they were chasing an unarmed man with weapons drawn. Even IF h committed a crime, and even IF he attacked and took one of their guns, they would STILL be guilty of a felony. The only difference would be they wouldn’t be guilty of murder.
There is NO scenario where a shooting was justified once they were chasing an unarmed man with weapons drawn. Even IF h committed a crime, and even IF he attacked and took one of their guns, they would STILL be guilty of a felony. The only difference would be they wouldn’t be guilty of murder.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 2:10 pm to GeorgePaton
quote:
The videos are there. The videos don't lie. Decide for yourself.
OK, I checked it out.
He came after a dude. Dude had a shotgun. Dude defended himself.
Posted on 5/10/20 at 2:15 pm to Reubaltaich
quote:
Arbery was clearly the aggressor in all this.
They're the ones with guns and one McMichael exited the car with a shotgun once Arbery reached the area their car was, that's textbook assault and Arbery had every right to stand his ground
quote:
McMicheal has good evidence that Arbery had some sort of weapon and had reasonable cause to arm himself and be ready for a potential deadly attack from Arbery
they don't have a solid platform to pursue Arbery since none of the evidence or reports establish they had probable cause of the commission of a felony to pursue under Georgia's vigilante law
quote:
McMicheals will probably get a hostile jury and will not get a fair trail.
This is actually a valid issue to consider
quote:
The first DA, Barnhill
not sure citing someone who was conflicted out of this incident is very wise for credibility
quote:
'hot pursuit of a burglary suspect with solid first-hand probable cause'
1. since this guy was conflicted out he doesn't have credibility
2.
quote:
On Sunday, February 23rd, a call came into 911 Dispatch stating that, “a black male running down the street” might be responsible for a “rash of burglaries” in the neighborhood.
quote:
The caller advised dispatch that there was a man, “in a house right now. It’s a house under construction.” When 911 Dispatch attempted to get a clarification for what crime was occurring (outside of a possible trespass). No answer was given but rather the caller (name censored) stated, “He has been caught on camera a bunch before at night. It’s kind of an ongoing thing here.”
quote:
Instead of waiting for police, Travis and Gregory notified their neighbor and loaded up onto a pickup truck to confront the man they suspect of the recent burglaries. That man was Ahmoud Arbery.
the link: LINK
quote:
There are two key issues with the McMichael’s claims of a citizen’s arrest. First, at best, the incident at hand was tantamount to a trespassing incident. No burglary took place on this date and time and therefore the “citizen arrest” in this instance is unlawful (see law above) as the crime committed was no longer taking place.
quote:
Now lets suggest the McMichael’s thought a burglary had just taken place. Is their platform solid?
quote:
The call to 911 made by someone among the McMichael’s party does nothing to defend the mindset that they believed a burglary had just taken place. At best it suggest suspicion of prior incidents.
quote:
This therefore violates another key portion of the legal statue that states the incident must be committed “in his presence or immediate knowledge of.” A “stale” felony (one that occurred at a different time) does not warrant a civilian to act to arrest anyone.
The conflicted DA's accounts of this being lawful are disproven immediately
quote:
It that video, there is someone standing watching Arbery. If that proves to be the McMicheals then this case is over before it begins.
Well, it also depends on whether they had probable cause that him trespassing (misdemeanor) merges into burglary. It can't just be that one of them's there observing Arbery and that saves him. Need more than that.
Page 10 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News