Posted on 05/10/2020 1:30:57 PM PDT by Brookhaven
It's a podcast. No text available.
I 100% agree with you
I take issue with the prosecutors statement. Nowhere in the U.S. are people punished for their relative's crime. That's a communist thing. They tried to smear Trump about his father being arrested. I guess you agreed with that smear?
He was going to be shot whether he tried to fight back or not. At least he stood up for himself.
Gosh.
I’ve seen many people run in boots. For many reasons or no reason at all. Some people don’t want to dirty their nicer shoes. Some people have foot problems.
Sure, the most ‘famous’ guy I recall was Marvelous Marvin Hagler. On the beach, in winter with military boots. Tough dude.
Yes, they were the aggressors. An you can't threaten someone with a gun, just because they had their hands in their pants. If they thought he had a gun, they should have let the police take care of it.
They told a whole mess of lies, and their story made no sense.
They were looking for this man to kill him. They just weren't smart enough to come up with a coherent story.
Thank you for posting the burglary statute. This actually backs up the defendants’ case more. In most states, a burglary requires an intent to commit a felony. In Georgia, it apparently includes misdemeanor theft.
They[father and son] the chain of events that led to the contact when they armed themselves, got in their vehicle and pursued the victim. Once they began their pursuit, they were responsible for all that ensued.
They didn't mind talking to the police, because they knew they would be protected by the D.A.
The police knew all along their story was a pack of lies. The father's buddy, the D.A., was trying to shut it down. The police were probably the ones who made the initial link. They knew what the D.A. was doing.
They weren't police. They have no legal right to follow someone that may have committed a crime and belligerently threaten him with a gun. By that point they were already guilty of kidnapping an several other crimes. CLEARLY their intention wasn’t to shoot him for fleeing.
I think their intention was to shoot him all along. For "resisting."
There story makes no sense, and they couldn't pick a side. They said he had his hands in his pants, because they wanted to be able to claim he had a gun, for when they used their guns.
But someone is't running from a crime scene with their hands in their pants. Plus, they would have had to go get the gun. (Which would not give them the right to go after him anyway)
Their story makes no sense. They were going after this specific guy all along. They didn't just happen to be stalking him when they saw him commit a crime and they were entitles to run posse on him.
Intent to commit first degree Murder in Florida Courts by the accused reloading his gun. There is no time limit in defining how long it takes to form intent. It can be 6 years, 6 months, or 6 tenths of a second. At least in Florida. Georgia may be different.
“They[father and son] the chain of events that led to the contact when they armed themselves, got in their vehicle and pursued the victim. Once they began their pursuit, they were responsible for all that ensued.”
***********************************************
Nope. When it comes to the shooting, the things that the father/son did before the instant of the shooting is, in essence, irrelevant. And the things that Arbery did before what happened in the front of the truck are also irrelevant. The only thing that counts in the criminal case is did Arbery physically charge the son and attempt to wrestle the shotgun from him and did the son, IN HIS MIND, have a fear for his life. You obviously don’t like that but THAT is the law of self-defense in Georgia.
Oh please. As someone who has tried over 300 jury trials in criminal courts, allow me to provide some legal advice to you and other “citizen lawyers” on this board. Probable cause is the universal legal standard. Police can’t arrest people without probable cause, and neither can citizens. PC is a very SLIGHT standard. For example, if 1 witness says they saw me commit a murder and 2 witnesses say I’m innocent, there is PC to arrest me. FACTS are very important. PC is an OBJECTIVE STANDARD, not subjective. With that said, if I were the lawyers for the McMichaels, I would point out the following to establish PC:
1) The elder McMichael was standing outside and witnessed the suspect SPRINTING past him and up the street;
2) When yelled at and commanded to “stop,” he kept going;
3) The house he ran from had been burgled several times recently (as backed up by the 911 caller). My clients knew this house had been targeted, and had been shown video of the perpetrator, who matched this suspect’s description.
4) The person who burgled the home previously was a young black male that my client the elder McMichael recognized from previous incidents; Judge, we know that criminals are dumb and always return to the scene of the crime.
5) Judge, Why else would this guy be in this house under construction?; This happened on a SUNDAY when the construction crew was off work.
6) A neighbor was outside yelling and indicating that this guy was running from the house.
7) Judge, there is a presumption that when someone illegally enters private land, and then further illegally enters a structure, that his purpose is to steal/burglarize;
8) Under GA law, intent to steal anything (even misdemeanor amounts) in a structure is burglary.
9) The suspects SPRINTING AWAY indicates “consciousness of guilt;” His refusal to stop, his changing direction and running an odd route through a neighborhood when we got in our truck again shows he was up to no good and must have been engaged in criminal conduct.
10) He obviously didn’t live in the neighborhood because its an all white neighborhood.
That, my friend is very, very solid PC.
Along with being correct. Being a real, licensed , until he surrendered his License to Practice Law lawyer. Not one of the jail house lawyers on here.
Actually, the Georgia standard for citizens is quite broad. The felony has to occur within one’s “presence” or within one’s “knowledge.” Obviously dad had knowledge, because he called 911 to report it. The issue is did he have PC. See my other post where I lay the PC out in detail.
It’s amazing how somebody’s view of abortion makes folks turn the “off switch”, personally speaking.
I literally couldn’t listen to him anymore after he went into meltdown mode against Pro-Lifers on one of his segments.
People are ignoring that the father knew this guy from when he was at the D.A. That it too much coincidence for me, and you add that to their story, which makes no sense. I think they were targeting this specific man. And I think the police found out about it, and they were angered by the D.A. not acting on it.
Do you believe every 911 call? Sometimes they are just a ruse.
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.