Georgia shooting of a black man

HMP said:
if guys are threatening and pull out a shotgun then I can understand why he felt threatened and would try to disarm.
Click to expand...
Bad JuJu.......time to beat feet.....become a moving target if You are unarmed. Now We, as in Me and You, would never be out roaming around Unarmed. That in itself makes this whole Cluster look different to us....we would hopefully be a little more prepared. If I'm cut off by men in a vehicle and they pile out with a shotgun, I'm not assuming they want to show me their new Whoopti Doo new Mouseberg pump. The moment they approach me in an aggressive manner pointing any firearm At Me ...it's ON. Provocation, Investigation, or Attack are way down the list of What's Going On Here???
Since I don't carry a Cell phone Every damn step of my life, I'd sit and wait on the Poleeeece and tell them Immediately I needed to speak to J. Noble Daggett.
Is this a perfect response to This situation???? My answer is...I ain't Dead....we'll work through the rest. We work through alot of this kinda thing here. You can't cover All the What Ifs, but the more you put into your old noggin the better off you'll be.
Remember the End Result should always be....I'm still alive. You agree @Have gun-will travel ???? Ima bet you DO.


ETA: I'm sure you have always heard the first rule in a gunfight is To Have A Gun...This is NOT correct...as was pointed out to me by a man that has had to take lives in gunfights the FIRST RULE is.........................................Don't Get Shot. After That all else is secondary.

This equates to me....IF you are unarmed, outside, with room to move.............Beat Feet ....in Over Drive.
 
Last edited:
Gunbelt said:
That’s all well & good but, at some point citizens gotta take up the slack. We need to get back to “well he needed killin anyway. A thief needs killin whether it a skilsaw or a $1000. Who should do that killin? Why the property owner of course, that’s how this shit stops. There life is of no consequence. Rioters, looters, worthless POS blocking roads with their racist protests keeping Taxpayers from their travels. Put em down like mad dogs. No one really cares. This Ashbury dude was a thief looking to steal something, he needed killin. Ask George Floyd’s parents if they’d rather have old George back or all those $$$. We all know the answer to that question.
Click to expand...
I don't agree that petty theft deserves the death penalty with ordinary citizens being judge, jury and executioners.

:)Glad to see you're apparently feeling better. Pancreatitis is a beeyotch.
 
I would like to make a few points on this case.

First, Aubry wasn't a jogger but ya'll know this.

Second, the guys following him weren't driving through yards to cut him off. He could have evaded them.

Third, it is legal to detain someone suspected of a crime until the police arrive. They had called the police.

Fourth, When he tried to take the gun from the guy that became a life or death struggle and put people in danger that hadn't existed up to that point. The guys hadn't been shooting at him and there was no reason to believe that would until he made it a literal gun fight.


Were the guys stupid for acting the way they did? Maybe but we can't lock people up for bad decisions only illegal ones.

Take that as you will.
 
Last edited:
J R Green said:
...Fourth, When he tried to take the gun from the guy that became a life or death struggle and put people in danger that hadn't existed up to that point. The guys hadn't been shooting at him and there was no reason to believe that would until he made it a literal gun fight...
Click to expand...

I've been thinking throughout this entire thread that this is the ONE BIG POINT.

Think about it. Everything else is an attempt to determine/adjudicate/mind-read the involved parties' motives, prejudices, thought process, state of mind, wisdom or lack thereof, rationales, etc., which is interesting stuff if you're a SJW or Sociologist, and perhaps even marginally relevant, but certainly not the main components of a Felony Murder charge: meaning a victim was killed during the commission of an underlying felony. What am I missing/Where am I wrong?
 
Aardvark said:
I've been thinking throughout this entire thread that this is the ONE BIG POINT.

Think about it. Everything else is an attempt to determine/adjudicate/mind-read the involved parties' motives, prejudices, thought process, state of mind, wisdom or lack thereof, rationales, etc., which is interesting stuff if you're a SJW or Sociologist, and perhaps even marginally relevant, but certainly not the main components of a Felony Murder charge: meaning a victim was killed during the commission of an underlying felony. What am I missing/Where am I wrong?
Click to expand...
Perhaps you're missing the part where the defendants admitted they didn't see him take anything, nor did he have anything on him so what are you talking about commission of a felony???
Or maybe you're missing the part about who the heck robs a construction site with no vehicle, no bag, or no tools?

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Aardvark said:
I've been thinking throughout this entire thread that this is the ONE BIG POINT.

Think about it. Everything else is an attempt to determine/adjudicate/mind-read the involved parties' motives, prejudices, thought process, state of mind, wisdom or lack thereof, rationales, etc., which is interesting stuff if you're a SJW or Sociologist, and perhaps even marginally relevant, but certainly not the main components of a Felony Murder charge: meaning a victim was killed during the commission of an underlying felony. What am I missing/Where am I wrong?
Click to expand...
I think you are minus one felony.
 
Wahoo95 said:
Perhaps you're missing the part where the defendants admitted they didn't see him take anything, nor did he have anything on him so what are you talking about commission of a felony???
Or maybe you're missing the part about who the heck robs a construction site with no vehicle, no bag, or no tools?

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Who does it? A stupid criminal! And in other dumb crook news...
Oh yeah & you ain't in the basement with that blackguarding.
 
Last edited:
Wahoo95 said:
Perhaps you're missing the part where the defendants admitted they didn't see him take anything, nor did he have anything on him so what are you talking about commission of a felony???
Or maybe you're missing the part about who the heck robs a construction site with no vehicle, no bag, or no tools?

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

J R Green said:
I think you are minus one felony.
Click to expand...

Chill a moment please. In my understanding, the "felony" part of the actual Felony Murder charge is the aggravated assault that was being committed by the defendants.

Is Felony Murder no longer the main charge?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J R Green said:
Were the guys stupid for acting the way they did? Maybe but we can't lock people up for bad decisions only illegal ones.
Click to expand...
I say the same thing for rittenhouse and zimmerman
some fights aren't worth it
some are. you gotta pick which ones to fight, and make sure you're on the right side of the law, or be ready to go to prison for a few decades over the chance that you might lose a little cash.
Do you want to risk your life being locked up over a few weeks of forced slavery?
 
Aardvark said:
Chill a moment please. In my understanding, the "felony" part of the actual Felony Murder charge is the aggravated assault that was being committed by the defendants.

Is Felony Murder no longer the main charge?
Click to expand...
I don't know where you are getting an agg. assault. Following him isn't an assault nor is trying to detain him for police.
 
J R Green said:
I don't know where you are getting an agg. assault. Following him isn't an assault nor is trying to detain him for police.
Click to expand...

I'm not telling you the story of what you or I or anyone else "BELIEVES" was happening. I'm telling you what the actual charges are: Felony Murder: "The felony murder charges against the McMichaels mean that a victim was killed during the commission of an underlying felony, in this case aggravated assault. The charge doesn’t require intent to kill."

From Here:

abcnews.go.com

White father, son charged with murder in Ahmaud Arbery case

More than two months after a black man was shot to death while running through a Georgia neighborhood, the white father and son arrested in the case had their first court appearance on charges of felony murder and aggravated assault
abcnews.go.com abcnews.go.com
 
Aardvark said:
I'm not telling you the story of what you or I or anyone else "BELIEVES" was happening. I'm telling you what the actual charges are: Felony Murder: "The felony murder charges against the McMichaels mean that a victim was killed during the commission of an underlying felony, in this case aggravated assault. The charge doesn’t require intent to kill."

From Here:

abcnews.go.com

White father, son charged with murder in Ahmaud Arbery case

More than two months after a black man was shot to death while running through a Georgia neighborhood, the white father and son arrested in the case had their first court appearance on charges of felony murder and aggravated assault
abcnews.go.com abcnews.go.com
Click to expand...
That's why there is a trial. Being charged doesn't necessarily mean that's what happened.
 
J R Green said:
That's why there is a trial. Being charged doesn't necessarily mean that's what happened.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I was just noting upthread that the actual charge of Felony Murder accuses the defendants of committing a felony that resulted in a death.

@Wahoo95 apparently read that as me personally accusing Aubury of committing felony, I guess you believed I personally was accusing the defendants of something you personally don't agree with. I didn't file the charge, just related it. I apologize for whatever my contribution to the confusion might have been.
 
Aardvark said:
I've been thinking throughout this entire thread that this is the ONE BIG POINT.

Think about it. Everything else is an attempt to determine/adjudicate/mind-read the involved parties' motives, prejudices, thought process, state of mind, wisdom or lack thereof, rationales, etc., which is interesting stuff if you're a SJW or Sociologist, and perhaps even marginally relevant, but certainly not the main components of a Felony Murder charge: meaning a victim was killed during the commission of an underlying felony. What am I missing/Where am I wrong?
Click to expand...

Aggravated Assault is a felony in Georgia. The prosecution is calling detaining him with a firearm aggravated assault. The aggravated assault escalated to the felony murder. IN layman's terms, assault with a deadly weapon. If you don't believe the firearm qualifies for some reason then you have to explain how hitting someone with 2 separate vehicles is not also aggravated assault. There are 3 charges of AA, one for the gun and two for the trucks.

Aggravated Assault​

Aggravated assault, a felony in Georgia, is an assault that is committed:

  • with the intent to rob, rape or murder
  • with a deadly weapon or any object that can be or is used in a manner that results in serious bodily injury or strangulation, or
  • by discharging a firearm from a vehicle.
(Ga. Code Ann. § 16-5-21).


The grand jury document is here.



The false imprisonment charge is also a felony in GA. So they are charged with committing 4 felonies before Arbery was shot.

So they got themselves involved in a situation they did not have all the information for. They acted on bad information. They used the bad information to try and justify felony actions. They ended up killing Arbery in a struggle based on bad information, questionable intention, and horrifyingly bad tactics. They got into a power struggle with someone that was not willing to give in. That power struggle, pissing contest, ego match ended how most of them end. In violence. And based on what I've seen and heard I think those knuckleheads' need to pay for that level or stupidity and arrogance. They went ready for a fight, they found one, and IMO being armed bolstered their arrogance and stupidity to a level that helped them act more aggressively than they would have likely acted unarmed. Guns are not talismans. They don't magically make people do anything. And when that broke down, it got ugly fast. And they initiated, continued, and forced the entire interaction.

On the flip side. If Arbery got control of the weapon and killed one or all of them I'd be good with that too. Of if he had his own and defended himself.

You don't get to initiate this kind of stupid, aggressive tactic on feelings, hunches, or beliefs. If you don't have facts you better approach it in a much different way. They didn't. They were wrong. They let whatever was in their head get the best of them and someone is dead that shouldn't be. You come at me with a shotgun and no way to escape and one of us is not making it out. No idea which one but it will be a fight to the death once I try to get away and I am kept from getting away. And me attacking them in self defense does not justify them shooting me when they initiated and continued the entire situation as the aggressor.
 
Last edited:
chiefjason said:
Aggravated Assault is a felony in Georgia. The prosecution is calling detaining him with a firearm aggravated assault. The aggravated assault escalated to the felony murder. IN layman's terms, assault with a deadly weapon. If you don't believe the firearm qualifies for some reason then you have to explain how hitting someone with 2 separate vehicles is not also aggravated assault. There are 3 charges of AA, one for the gun and two for the trucks.

Aggravated Assault​

Aggravated assault, a felony in Georgia, is an assault that is committed:

  • with the intent to rob, rape or murder
  • with a deadly weapon or any object that can be or is used in a manner that results in serious bodily injury or strangulation, or
  • by discharging a firearm from a vehicle.
(Ga. Code Ann. § 16-5-21).


The grand jury document is here.



The false imprisonment charge is also a felony in GA. So they are charged with committing 4 felonies before Arbery was shot.

So they got themselves involved in a situation they did not have all the information for. They acted on bad information. They used the bad information to try and justify felony actions. They ended up killing Arbery in a struggle based on bad information, questionable intention, and horrifyingly bad tactics. They got into a power struggle with someone that was not willing to give in. That power struggle, pissing contest, ego match ended how most of them end. In violence. And based on what I've seen and heard I think those knuckleheads' need to pay for that level or stupidity and arrogance. They went ready for a fight, they found one, and IMO being armed bolstered their arrogance and stupidity to a level that helped them act more aggressively than they would have likely acted unarmed. Guns are not talismans. They don't magically make people do anything. And when that broke down, it got ugly fast. And they initiated, continued, and forced the entire interaction.

On the flip side. If Arbery got control of the weapon and killed one or all of them I'd be good with that too. Of if he had his own and defended himself.

You don't get to initiate this kind of stupid, aggressive tactic on feelings, hunches, or beliefs. If you don't have facts you better approach it in a much different way. They didn't. They were wrong. They let whatever was in their head get the best of them and someone is dead that shouldn't be. You come at me with a shotgun and no way to escape and one of us is not making it out. No idea which one but it will be a fight to the death once I try to get away and I am kept from getting away. And me attacking them in self defense does not justify them shooting me when they initiated and continued the entire situation as the aggressor.
Click to expand...
According to the statute you posted the Aggrivated assault charge doesn't meet the elements unless you think they intended to rape, rob or kill him at the outset.

I'd have to read the elements of the other but if they have a law that allows them to detain someone for the police then it would vacate the false imprisonment.
 
These three stooges should have admitted what they did was wrong and asked for a plea deal and not went to trial.
 
BatteryOaksBilly said:
Bad JuJu.......time to beat feet.....become a moving target if You are unarmed. Now We, as in Me and You, would never be out roaming around Unarmed. That in itself makes this whole Cluster look different to us....we would hopefully be a little more prepared. If I'm cut off by men in a vehicle and they pile out with a shotgun, I'm not assuming they want to show me their new Whoopti Doo new Mouseberg pump. The moment they approach me in an aggressive manner pointing any firearm At Me ...it's ON. Provocation, Investigation, or Attack are way down the list of What's Going On Here???
Since I don't carry a Cell phone Every damn step of my life, I'd sit and wait on the Poleeeece and tell them Immediately I needed to speak to J. Noble Daggett.
Is this a perfect response to This situation???? My answer is...I ain't Dead....we'll work through the rest. We work through alot of this kinda thing here. You can't cover All the What Ifs, but the more you put into your old noggin the better off you'll be.
Remember the End Result should always be....I'm still alive. You agree @Have gun-will travel ???? Ima bet you DO.


ETA: I'm sure you have always heard the first rule in a gunfight is To Have A Gun...This is NOT correct...as was pointed out to me by a man that has had to take lives in gunfights the FIRST RULE is.........................................Don't Get Shot. After That all else is secondary.

This equates to me....IF you are unarmed, outside, with room to move.............Beat Feet ....in Over Drive.
Click to expand...
If someone or a group of someone's approach me and show me a glimpse of aggression towards me and it makes me afierd for my life you can bet yo sweet ass I AIN'T GOING TO BE STANDING THERE WAITING FOR THEM . I'M to damn old to fight someone with my hands so I'll just choot dem.Thats all I have to say bout dat
 
J R Green said:
According to the statute you posted the Aggrivated assault charge doesn't meet the elements unless you think they intended to rape, rob or kill him at the outset.

I'd have to read the elements of the other but if they have a law that allows them to detain someone for the police then it would vacate the false imprisonment.
Click to expand...

Three separate criteria. Not all three necessary. Your reading would make the third oddly specific making the entire stature useless.

No one is shooting out of a vehicle while attempting to rape someone.
 
elirab said:
I don't see these three guys getting the same decision Rittenhouse did.
Click to expand...
and where the rittenhouse exhonoration proves that society is corrupt and racism is still everywhere
...
their conviction will prove that society is corrupt and racism is still everywhere

we're probably beyond the point of turning this ship around
 
DrScaryGuy said:
and where the rittenhouse exhonoration proves that society is corrupt and racism is still everywhere
...
their conviction will prove that society is corrupt and racism is still everywhere

we're probably beyond the point of turning this ship around
Click to expand...
I don't know that either the acquittal of Kyle or the probable conviction of the three horseman prove anything about society.

I do agree that there is unlikely to be a change in course. Inertia is pretty strong. Absent some external force the course is set.
 
chiefjason said:
Three separate criteria. Not all three necessary. Your reading would make the third oddly specific making the entire stature useless.

No one is shooting out of a vehicle while attempting to rape someone.
Click to expand...
Actually only two. Note the or at bullet three, bullet 1 and 2 are both necessary. Or bullet 3.
 
J R Green said:
I would like to make a few points on this case.

First, Aubry wasn't a jogger but ya'll know this.

Second, the guys following him weren't driving through yards to cut him off. He could have evaded them.

Third, it is legal to detain someone suspected of a crime until the police arrive. They had called the police.

Fourth, When he tried to take the gun from the guy that became a life or death struggle and put people in danger that hadn't existed up to that point. The guys hadn't been shooting at him and there was no reason to believe that would until he made it a literal gun fight.


Were the guys stupid for acting the way they did? Maybe but we can't lock people up for bad decisions only illegal ones.

Take that as you will.
Click to expand...
I want to talk about point 3
According to the son, the father had NOT called the police.
Also, in Georgia, apparently, there is no citizens arrest clause/law/whatever.

I was reading up on this more today during lunch (and for the record @BatteryOaksBilly , it was taco day for me lol), and the son stated that he THOUGHT the father had called the cops, but he had not. He never saw the kid with a gun, never felt/was threatened by him...but he still produced a shotgun after cutting the kid off?



Billy - I agree that getting away is smart. But , and this is just my point of view on the video, it seemed like Aubrey maybe didnt see the gun until it was one truck width away from a man with a gun. Maybe, I dont know.
Either way, I dont think this will work out for at least two of these three men.
Glad to hear about KR.
 
elirab said:
I don't know that either the acquittal of Kyle or the probable conviction of the three horseman prove anything about society.

I do agree that there is unlikely to be a change in course. Inertia is pretty strong. Absent some external force the course is set.
Click to expand...
i should have been more clear
no matter what verdict, no matter what case, the news will interpret it to be that racism is the reason
 
HMP said:
I want to talk about point 3
According to the son, the father had NOT called the police.
Also, in Georgia, apparently, there is no citizens arrest clause/law/whatever.

I was reading up on this more today during lunch (and for the record @BatteryOaksBilly , it was taco day for me lol), and the son stated that he THOUGHT the father had called the cops, but he had not. He never saw the kid with a gun, never felt/was threatened by him...but he still produced a shotgun after cutting the kid off?



Billy - I agree that getting away is smart. But , and this is just my point of view on the video, it seemed like Aubrey maybe didnt see the gun until it was one truck width away from a man with a gun. Maybe, I dont know.
Either way, I dont think this will work out for at least two of these three men.
Glad to hear about KR.
Click to expand...
You could be right. I haven't really followed this very closely. I just remember reading that they called police. I'm not willing to look it up right now but it's hard to imagine them not having some kind of detainment clause.
 
HMP said:
...
Also, in Georgia, apparently, there is no citizens arrest clause/law/whatever...
Click to expand...

Georgia had a longstanding provision for a "Citizens Arrest" to be legally done at the time of the incident. I have not read or heard any opinions on whether the defendants were acting within the boundaries of that law.

That particular law has since been repealed/eliminated by the State Legislature.
 
J R Green said:
Actually only two. Note the or at bullet three, bullet 1 and 2 are both necessary. Or bullet 3.
Click to expand...

Man I have no idea why you are being so damn obtuse about this. That's a lawyers definition so lets just go straight to the Georgia wording since you are so damn stuck on being right defending people that couldn't get much more wrong. Note that the lawyer site did not include the entirety of the statute (just the most relevant parts) and misplaced the "or" that you are hung up on. Again, according to the state there are 4 SEPERATE areas where you can commit Aggravated Assault. The AA is the felony they were committing when the homicide happened resulting in the felony homicide.

Maybe you still don't agree with it. But IIRC it was you that wanted to know what felony was being committed that resulted in the felony murder charge.



Chapter 5 - Crimes Against the Person
Article 2 - Assault and Battery
§ 16-5-21. Aggravated assault​

Universal Citation: GA Code § 16-5-21 (2019)
  • (a) A person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he or she assaults:
    • (1) With intent to murder, to rape, or to rob;
    • (2) With a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury;
    • (3) With any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in strangulation; or
    • (4) A person or persons without legal justification by discharging a firearm from within a motor vehicle toward a person or persons.

Just to allow to try and dig your hole deeper, here is the statute in it's entirety.



law.justia.com

2019 Georgia Code :: Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses :: Chapter 5 - Crimes Against the Person :: Article 2 - Assault and Battery :: § 16-5-21. Aggravated assault

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes
law.justia.com law.justia.com
 
Looked it up, at the time there WAS a citizens arrest law on the books, my bad. It's since been repealed. But the verbage stated that the crime had to have been done in your presence/immediate knowledge. My apologies for false information.

Father had a handgun, son had a shotgun. They were chasing him and blocking him/cutting him off. All they wanted to do was talk - per the son.
Would you stop and have a chat with them?
 
DrScaryGuy said:
i should have been more clear
no matter what verdict, no matter what case, the news will interpret it to be that racism is the reason
Click to expand...
On the Arbery case the "racism" part comes into play when you factor in how the police and the DA improperly handled things. There should have been more people charged in my opinion.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 
chiefjason said:
Man I have no idea why you are being so damn obtuse about this. That's a lawyers definition so lets just go straight to the Georgia wording since you are so damn stuck on being right defending people that couldn't get much more wrong. Note that the lawyer site did not include the entirety of the statute (just the most relevant parts) and misplaced the "or" that you are hung up on. Again, according to the state there are 4 SEPERATE areas where you can commit Aggravated Assault. The AA is the felony they were committing when the homicide happened resulting in the felony homicide.

Maybe you still don't agree with it. But IIRC it was you that wanted to know what felony was being committed that resulted in the felony murder charge.



Chapter 5 - Crimes Against the Person​

Article 2 - Assault and Battery​

§ 16-5-21. Aggravated assault​

Universal Citation: GA Code § 16-5-21 (2019)
  • (a) A person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he or she assaults:
    • (1) With intent to murder, to rape, or to rob;
    • (2) With a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury;
    • (3) With any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in strangulation; or
    • (4) A person or persons without legal justification by discharging a firearm from within a motor vehicle toward a person or persons.

Just to allow to try and dig your hole deeper, here is the statute in it's entirety.



law.justia.com

2019 Georgia Code :: Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses :: Chapter 5 - Crimes Against the Person :: Article 2 - Assault and Battery :: § 16-5-21. Aggravated assault

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes
law.justia.com law.justia.com
Click to expand...
If you think I'm wrong why does it upset you so much. Let me be wrong. What you aren't getting is the way elements of a crime are written.

  • (1) With intent to murder, to rape, or to rob;
  • (2) With a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury;
  • (3) With any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in strangulation;
All of these factor have to be included starting with the intent. If you don't have intent, do not pass go, do not collect $200. Are you saying that they started out trying to rape murder or rob the guy?

or;

  • (4) A person or persons without legal justification by discharging a firearm from within a motor vehicle toward a person or persons.
You might have better luck with this one but since he was trying to take the one guys gun we could argue whether the shooting was justified. I think Rittenhouse might give you a clue on this.
 
J R Green said:
If you think I'm wrong why does it upset you so much. Let me be wrong. What you aren't getting is the way elements of a crime are written.

  • (1) With intent to murder, to rape, or to rob;
  • (2) With a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury;
  • (3) With any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in strangulation;
All of these factor have to be included starting with the intent. If you don't have intent, do not pass go, do not collect $200. Are you saying that they started out trying to rape murder or rob the guy?

or;

  • (4) A person or persons without legal justification by discharging a firearm from within a motor vehicle toward a person or persons.
You might have better luck with this one but since he was trying to take the one guys gun we could argue whether the shooting was justified. I think Rittenhouse might give you a clue on this.
Click to expand...

Because semi colons can be used to separate individual ideas or to link like statements. IMO, in this legal statute they are separating single elements of the crime because those single elements include lists with commas. Or in other words according to this lawyer. Emphasis mine.


Elements of Aggravated Assault:

To obtain conviction, the prosecutor must prove the elements of aggravated assault which include: 1) an assault on a person as defined in OCGA 16-5-20, and 2) the presence of ANY of the statutory aggravators enumerated in OCGA 16-5-21 (b).

.......


What circumstances transform simple assault into aggravated assault?

The presence of any one of the following conditions will make assault aggravated:

......


  1. Use of deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.
Actual injury is not required. Mere possibility that serious injury would result from the use of deadly weapon, object, device, or instrument is enough. The “deadly” nature or character of a weapon is determined by the jury. Any “object, device, or instrument” that has the potential of being used offensively against a person can be considered an instrument of aggression. Knives, baseball bats, bottles, books, bags, pens, phones, vehicles, sticks, and furniture can all be used to attack a person and thus qualify as objects that can be used in effecting the crime of aggravated assault. Everything that can inflict injury is virtually included in the list.



bixonlaw.com

Basics Of Aggravated Assault In Georgia

The Official Code of Georgia Annotated (OCGA) 16-5-21(b) states that a person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he or she assaults: With intent
bixonlaw.com bixonlaw.com

And I think you are being obtuse. On purpose. You are free to be wrong. But dragging others along with you is the annoying part. The "any" in his interpretation is the important part BTW.
 
Wahoo95 said:
On the Arbery case the "racism" part comes into play when you factor in how the police and the DA improperly handled things. There should have been more people charged in my opinion.
Click to expand...
racism or nepotism and good-ol-boy-club? while they can easily mix, they don't necessarily have to.
Like 3 white guys getting shot by a white guy. the lone white guy is racist because the 3 shot white guys were part of the right club.
 
DrScaryGuy said:
Like 3 white guys getting shot by a white guy. the lone white guy is racist because the 3 shot white guys were part of the right club.
Click to expand...


dd0.png
 
DrScaryGuy said:
racism or nepotism and good-ol-boy-club? while they can easily mix, they don't necessarily have to.
Like 3 white guys getting shot by a white guy. the lone white guy is racist because the 3 shot white guys were part of the right club.
Click to expand...


Oh, crap, I get it now, KR. I apologize, I thought you were still drunk on punk rock and booze this early Sunday (yall Fayetteville...)
Apologies for not connecting the dots at first.
 
DrScaryGuy said:
racism or nepotism and good-ol-boy-club? while they can easily mix, they don't necessarily have to.
Like 3 white guys getting shot by a white guy. the lone white guy is racist because the 3 shot white guys were part of the right club.
Click to expand...

Wrong. DAs, judges, police, and other political creatures of the justice system have never improperly handled a case involving a white person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom