Georgia shooting of a black man
- Thread starter Variable
- Start date
- Replies 1,192
- Views 39,441
Next they will be saying he stopped by to drop off some food for the needy.
Hope they don't OJ it.
Probably sporting clays or skeet,we wouldn't want to insinuate that they'd needlessly kill another living being.
Nah, they had ropes in the truck. I was a lynching party. Didn't you see the invitations?
Since the two of them are not very smart, they should ask for a manslaughter plea and avoid a trial. They will have to deal with other inmates who may have a problem with what they did on that day, otherwise hope they have $50K in the savings and loan for lawyer retainers for each of them.
No, didn't see that. I was too busy blocking my neighborhood street with my truck and standing in the road with my shotgun. Doesn't everybody do that at least a couple of times a week?
Don't know about you but I've questioned people before with a gun in my hand.
Did it once when I was about 15 and there were two of them.
Did it once when I was about 15 and there were two of them.
The prior bad acts of the deceased would only be relevant in the father/son defense if they could prove they had knowledge of them prior to the actions they took. Still may not be admitted, by the judge at trial, but there is an exception in the rules of evidence.
Last edited:
If my memory serves, the prosecution can use any of it to discredit the defendant. He will use employment records, former employers, supervisors and coworkers. The defendant is free to take the stand and attempt to rehabilitate his reputation, but then would be subject to cross examination. He probably won't.
It's not supposed to be an issue for either. Only thing that should matter is what happened at that moment. Problem is whenever we have these incidents there are those who's first response is to dig up everything on the dead guy to make him look like he deserved it.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
No, some still believe his walking into the vacant house was worthy of armed confrontation.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
I'm not buying that story. Early reports his mom said he was studying to be an electrician and liked to check out construction sites to see the work.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
OJ would most likely been convicted if the police hadnt taken it upon themselves to try and help things along by planting evidence.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Nah, folks here say they were just minding their business as they stopped in the traffic lane to confront the man while armed.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Prosecution can show video from property owner of other folks on property and looking around, young kids included.
I knew it but I thought sheet rocker looking for dead wood.
Means he was operating outside the rules which says some things about his character considering the position
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Nobody needs to dig to find something that prompted the shooting, it's on the video.
Yeah like that black guy in the middle of the night. He too was an electrician.
Given the career of Gregory McMichael, he should have known better. One man dead, two others now have to account for their actions.
Reminds me of the Henry Fonda movie, The Wrong Man.
So, if I see you walking down the street in front of my house and think you look shady, it would be ok with you if I came out and detained you at gunpoint? And why would a citizen who has the right to freely travel on a public roadway have to do what some Bubba tells him to do? Also, what was he a suspect of? They didn't see him do anything.
Last edited:
You seemed to conveniently leave out the illegal trespassing part.
So yes, if you see me inside your house under construction, you have that right.
And I probably won't even aggressively charge, punch you in the head and try and take the gun from you forcing you to shoot.
But hey, I'm an electrician and I was just making sure you were up to code.
Last edited:
Would a uniformed officer have stopped him at gunpoint?
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
And you conveniently left out the part about what they actually witnessed....or didnt witness.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Just talking about your made up scenario.
Yes, with quite a bit of regularity, and not only that, I've seen cops detain people without drawing a gun to begin with.
They were conducting a false arrest, but nice try. Also, the police you keep referring to are also held accountable for using deadly force, and are also prosecuted when that force isn't justifiable, or when they're found to have attempted a false arrest.
Which is it, disarming, or putting guns down? As in the difference between being armed and brandishing said arms, or having said arms on your person but not brandishing them in a threatening manner, or not having them at all?
I agree with anyone's right to be armed at all times, including the two bubbas in question. I don't agree that that right encompasses their decision to brandish them in an attempt to force their will on their victim, nor to utilize unjustifiable deadly force.
Last edited:
Do you think they would have done it in that instance? FYI - Dodging the question makes your point even weaker.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Dont confuse being armed with an armed confrontation. Nobody said they cant or shouldn't be armed
Again, you're trying to hard to make the square peg fit and it weakens your point.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Last edited:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ahmaud-arbery-probable-cause-murder-case-georgia-bureau-investigations/
"According to the only witness in the police report, McMichael told investigators he thought Arbery was a burglary suspect and ordered him to stop."
I never said they couldn't be armed while conducting a citizen's arrest.