Posted on 05/10/2020 7:39:27 PM PDT by Widget Jr
It shows a man who appears to be Arbery entering and walking around a house being built. The men who killed Arbery told police they were concerned about break-ins.
I was simply looking at a home being built for sale.
People have the right to argue the defense for these yahoos, but one would hope that they're not putting any money on it in Vegas because they're going to lose.
(Also your suggestion of a question that no one could answer at this point: "How much you had to drink today?" is astute.)
So “defending yourself” means you charge ahead full speed and attack people?
I carry every day and can tell you if I did that, it would not turn out well for me.
The perp had an advantage over them. He was on foot and thus could have walked left or right. He didnt do that. Instead, he chose to run and attack them.
That is clearly NOT self defense in any sense of the word.
Would you shoot someone who charged at you and tried to grab your weapon?
And you apparently have never had your neighborhood terrorized by neighboring city thugs.
I have. It’s happening right now. Cops cant do anything because by the time they get here, the thugs are long gone. Only to return a day or 2 later.
They stole a car last time. We are terrified my sons sport looking car will get stolen and we only have liability insurance. Which means he is screwed is they make off with it.
So if we see the these same thugs spotted in neighborhood and on our neighbors cameras...if we see them next door, what do you suggest we do after we call 911 and they see us and take off running? Just be like shrug it’s not our business? Even though they ran across our property? Mu husband and son arent allowed to grab their guns for protections and try to stop them for police?
So you think they should just go to work and leave me and younger child here to fend for ourselves when they return. BECAUSE THEY ALWAYS DO. When does it end and when did conservatives and freepers turn into yellow bellied sitting ducks just taking it?
It defies logic
They had guns and had the right to have them, especially as the father who was former LE, knew of his criminal past.
If they DID NOT have the guns, the dead perp may have killed the son.
The dead perp CHOSE to attack. Why are you making excuses for criminals?
You didnt answer my question.
“If you charge someone to disarm them you are nuts.“
I guess it would depend on what words were exchanged, prior to the shooting, that would give the victim a reason to fear for his life, and the only way out was to attack the attacker. Maybe something like, “you are going to die” or “get on your knees or I will shoot you”.
The police report states they had not witnessed any crimes committed by their victim.
They grabbed guns because they believe their victim was armed and dangerous and hunted him down. The son got out of the truck to apprehend Arbery with a loaded shot gun in his hands, saying he wanted to “talk to him” at Arbery. That is “at gun point” to the victim at that moment.
We have a police report with the older McMichael’s witness account and now we have a video.
The police report is very damaging to McMichaels because they basically admitted this was their attempt at a police action, when none of them are current law enforcement. Elder McMichaels is retired law enforcement, his son, who is NOT law enforcement, nor retired law enforcement was the shooter and the murderer of his unarmed victim that the McMichaels and Byran (who was in the 2nd truck and shot the video) cornered.
And of course the three criminals are going to dispute this, and of course you are going to get yahoos who want to believe they can be both the aggressor so they can go out, chase people they think are criminals and shoot them and claim self defense at the same time.
She cannot provide any facts.
She is a Jersey know-it-all who in fact knows nothing.
Hypothetical question?
No thanks
I can not answer something that can’t happen in the future.
My question to you is
Do we have the right to murder a man because he might commit a crime in the future?
He should have called 911. I wonder why he didn’t?
.It wasn’t hypothetical. It was very likely what was going through their minds.
I ask because my neighborhood is in the same situation at the moment.
And your question is based on something that DID NOT happen at all.
Would you have walked up into a private citizens home they were building that was not for sale?
You mean, instead of charging them and attacking them in an OFFENSIVE manner?
For what?
Defending themselves against a CRIMINAL who was charging and attacking them?
WTF? Seriously, did you even see the video or are you just listening to what the media tells you?
I'm trying to find some light through the heat here. If your not already saturated or just fed up, your thoughts, please?
I should think the primary legal question to be answered is did the McMichaels, prior to giving chase, have reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion that Aubery, without authority, and with the intent to commit theft therein, enter or remain within a vacant building or structure?
Phrased differently, did the McMichaels, prior to giving chase, have reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion that Aubery had committed the felony of second degree burglary under GA Code § 16-7-1(c)?
The elder McMichael was an investigator for about 30 years, working for the Brunswick Judicial Circuit District Attorney’s Office. Prior to that he was a police officer for about 7 years, working for the Glynn County police.
https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2018/title-17/chapter-4/article-4/section-17-4-60/
2018 Georgia Code
Title 17 - Criminal Procedure
Chapter 4 - Arrest of Persons
Article 4 - Arrest by Private Persons
§ 17-4-60. Grounds for arrest Universal Citation: GA Code § 17-4-60 (2018)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.
Were there reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion of the felony of second degree burglary? Felony second degree burglary does not require a taking, but requires an intent to commit theft.
https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2018/title-16/chapter-7/article-1/section-16-7-1/
2018 Georgia Code
Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses
Chapter 7 - Damage to and Intrusion Upon Property
Article 1 - Burglary
§ 16-7-1. Burglary
Universal Citation: GA Code § 16-7-1 (2018)(c) A person commits the offense of burglary in the second degree when, without authority and with the intent to commit a felony or theft therein, he or she enters or remains within an occupied, unoccupied, or vacant building, structure, railroad car, watercraft, or aircraft. A person who commits the offense of burglary in the second degree shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years. Upon the second and all subsequent convictions for burglary in the second degree, the defendant shall be guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than eight years.
Were there reasonable and probable grounds to suspect second degree buglary, a felony?
https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2018/title-17/chapter-4/article-4/section-17-4-60/
(b) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority:(1) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose;
Was there reasonable and probable grounds to suspect criminal trespass, a misdemeanor? Misdemeanor criminal trespass does not require intent to commit theft; any unlawful purpose suffices.
https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2018/title-16/chapter-3/article-2/section-16-3-23.1/
2018 Georgia Code
Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses
Chapter 3 - Defenses to Criminal Prosecutions
Article 2 - Justification and Excuse
§ 16-3-23.1. No duty to retreat prior to use of force in self-defense
Universal Citation: GA Code § 16-3-23.1 (2018)A person who uses threats or force in accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, relating to the use of force in defense of self or others, Code Section 16-3-23, relating to the use of force in defense of a habitation, or Code Section 16-3-24, relating to the use of force in defense of property other than a habitation, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and use force as provided in said Code sections, including deadly force.
https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2018/title-16/chapter-3/article-2/section-16-3-21/
2018 Georgia Code
Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses
Chapter 3 - Defenses to Criminal Prosecutions
Article 2 - Justification and Excuse § 16-3-21. Use of force in defense of self or others; evidence of belief that force was necessary in murder or manslaughter prosecution
Universal Citation: GA Code § 16-3-21 (2018)
(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.
https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2018/title-16/chapter-3/article-2/section-16-3-24.2/
2018 Georgia Code
Title 16 - Crimes and Offenses
Chapter 3 - Defenses to Criminal Prosecutions
Article 2 - Justification and Excuse
§ 16-3-24.2. Immunity from prosecution; exception
Universal Citation: GA Code § 16-3-24.2 (2018)A person who uses threats or force in accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, 16-3-23, 16-3-23.1, or 16-3-24 shall be immune from criminal prosecution therefor unless in the use of deadly force, such person utilizes a weapon the carrying or possession of which is unlawful by such person under Part 2 of Article 4 of Chapter 11 of this title.
Again, you can not say that the victim was going to come back and attack the man’s wife or children and use that as a reason to murder him
That is why I asked you, do you have the right to murder a man because you believe he might commit a crime in the future.
Because that is what you are asking, I just worded it better back at you.
All we have is a video of this man allegedly walking through a house that is under construction, basically trespassing under Georgia law, which is not a felony, under Georgia law.
He was there for about 3 minutes.
Why was he there? I don’t know, admire the construction? Steal something? Vandalize it? We have no idea, the police can’t ask him because he was murdered.
No.
Why not?
Because you 1. Arent casing the place
2. Know it’s illegal.
Amiright?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.