- 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: The dad knew Ahmaud previously
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:50 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
that prosecuting agency and LEO are not going to enjoy the DOJ investigations
I feel like I could have handled the case better. But all I know of police work I learned from Columbo.
2
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:50 am to BayouCowboy
quote:
I don't think that police report helps the McMichaels.
It doesn't. I think the initial police report is full of "I believed" I "think".
There is a bunch of speculating that this is the man from the McMichaels viewpoints with very little proof that they "knew" this was the man.
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 10:52 am
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:50 am to Stidham8
quote:
It's totally relevant when the defendants are painting the picture that this wasn't a spotless 25 year old.
A shoplifting charge and a weapons charge from almost 10 years ago isn’t going to help them with this murder charge. It may help you feel better about the murder. That’s it.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:52 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
Columbo.
Peter Falk’s second best role
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:52 am to Stidham8
quote:
It's totally relevant when the defendants are painting the picture that this wasn't a spotless 25 year old.
So someone's past is enough to assume they are committing a felony with no direct knowledge?
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:53 am to the808bass
quote:
A shoplifting charge and a weapons charge from almost 10 years ago isn’t going to help them with this murder charge.
No, but it MIGHT counter the Medias' attempt at painting him as an Angel .
I'll say it again: If this guy was stealing, fk him, glad he's dead.
If the two shooters killed in cold blood, fk em', I hope they die.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:54 am to imjustafatkid
quote:You're right, but when you have the video AND the shooters' own words, then it becomes pretty crystal clear.
I'm not sure how you can come to the conclusion based on the video.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:54 am to oogabooga68
I get it. We all know what the media is doing.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:54 am to the808bass
quote:
A shoplifting charge and a weapons charge from almost 10 years ago isn’t going to help them with this murder charge. It may help you feel better about the murder. That’s it.
In conjunction with him potentially being on security camera footage trespassing on a construction site along with charging at the man with the shotgun who did not fire until he was provoked. Yes, yes it will. The jury will take everything into account.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:54 am to crazy4lsu
the problem is a very common one with LEO, especially "forensics". when you have a pre-determined outcome, you can easily mold evidence to that end
have you seen the netflix show about the innocence project? watch the first episode with the junk science "bite mark" expert
have you seen the netflix show about the innocence project? watch the first episode with the junk science "bite mark" expert
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:55 am to Stidham8
quote:
who did not fire until he was provoked. Yes, yes it will. The jury will take everything into account.
Rednecks in pickups chasing a guy through a neighborhood with guns isn’t “provoking?” Are you sure?
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:57 am to the808bass
quote:
Rednecks in pickups chasing a guy through a neighborhood with guns isn’t “provoking?” Are you sure?
Stopping a guy that was potentially trespassing/robbing (we'll see with the security tape), trying to get him to stop until police arrived, and then firing only upon being charged at by said potential burglar you mean?
That's the way this is going to go.
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 10:58 am
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:58 am to imjustafatkid
Can't really find a breakdown other than the below... which is odd, given that both terms are used. Asked a buddy who is an attorney in GA but haven't heard back yet.
LINK
quote:
I don't know what "within his immediate knowledge" means, so I can't agree with your statement. Hoping someone can define that for me.
LINK
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:58 am to the808bass
quote:
I get it. We all know what the media is doing.
And yet we can't help ourselves.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:59 am to davyjones
quote:
So "within his immediate knowledge" will be the relevant consideration it appears. That seems like it could be a tricky proposition for the father and son. For that standard to be met in this situation it would seem that the homeowner him or herself would need to perfect this citizens arrest. Otherwise, strong argument could be made that this was secondhand knowledge on the part of father and son.
Quick search I found a case from the Court of Appeals of Georgia that looks to get into "immediate knowledge"; they said in that case that a store employee couldn't have immediate knowledge to perform citizens arrest on someone stealing a store patrons wallet. It looks like the court said the patron would be the only one who could have the immediate knowledge to perform the citizens arrest. If I get more time I'll dig more into that and related cases
Edited: The case is Winn-Dixie Stores v. Nichols (205 Ga. App. 308 (1992))
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 11:01 am
Posted on 5/8/20 at 10:59 am to Stidham8
Potentially means also “potentially not.” And that’s the big difficulty. When you are carrying a gun to effect a citizens arrest and there’s no crime, there’s the potential for you to go to jail.
It’s one of the reasons that lots of people don’t try to effect citizens arrests.
It’s one of the reasons that lots of people don’t try to effect citizens arrests.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 11:00 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
And yet we can't help ourselves.
I can help myself. I don’t need to believe that Ahmaud never committed a crime to make a decision on what happened that day.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 11:00 am to Stidham8
quote:Nothing in his criminal history is especially bad (out of 2 incidents). Shoplifting is the worst, IMO, but there are a lot of people who had shoplifted at least once in their lives (most probably never caught) so it’s hard to use that as some evidence of anything.
It's totally relevant when the defendants are painting the picture that this wasn't a spotless 25 year old.
Regardless his minor criminal history is irrelevant anyways.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 11:01 am to jchamil
quote:
It looks like the court said the patron would be the only one who could have the immediate knowledge to perform the citizens arrest.
oh well if this hold they are frickED
Posted on 5/8/20 at 11:01 am to the808bass
quote:
Potentially means also “potentially not.” And that’s the big difficulty. When you are carrying a gun to effect a citizens arrest and there’s no crime, there’s the potential for you to go to jail.
It’s one of the reasons that lots of people don’t try to effect citizens arrests.
I agree. If there's no footage or evidence of him trespassing/committing burglary then they will be convicted.
But if he pops up on a security camera....
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 11:02 am
Page 20 of 33
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News