No witnesses? Your browser can't play video?
Posted on 05/09/2020 4:59:46 PM PDT by bort
This video was posted on the twitter account of Ahmaud Arbery's attorney, Lee Merritt. It shows Arbery stopping in front of the home. He then looks around and walks into the home, which is under construction. He walks out of the home and into the garage. He is in the house for at least 60 to 90 seconds. He then BOLTS out the front entrance of the house like Jesse Owens.
The problem with a lot of these people is they’re biased, and some don’t have an impartial bone in their body, they simply refuse to look at the evidence at hand.
Scary days.
Oh yeah, he just miraculously pulled a set of keys out of his ass for the skid steer.
Would ya like me to send you a few dozen stores/reports of construction sites being ripped off?
There are thousands of them Trooper.
No. Under GA law, you must WITNESS a crime to make a citizen's arrest. Because they did not witness him committing a crime, that had no legal basis--under GA law--to pursue him.
Next, did they have a right to impede him, detain him, ask him to stop, and even arrest him? Yes.
No. Again, GA law requires a person to WITNESS a crime before they can make a citizen's arrest.
The McMichaels did NOT witness the crime, thus they had no legal basis--under GA law--to detain him.
Because they did not witness the crime, what they did--pursue and detain--was illegal under GA law. They could actually be charged with performing an illegal citizen's arrest in GA.
Different states have different laws. That's the law in GA.
Same place he got the claw hammer.
No witnesses? Your browser can't play video?
What the pic does is gives the public a sense of the facts of the case that would be presented.
What the grainy screen capture does is give a false sense of what the facts are.
Any idea who that eye witness was?
Is he the one who made a 911 call?
thanks for posting that with the eyewitness noted.
.
.
If he saw the guy calling police,maybe that’s when he decided to become a jogger
Also, confronting someone with a firearm is part of the legal definition of force. If you're holding someone at gunpoint, you're not touching them but it sure is force.
Please answer the first question I asked. What crime was committed inside the construction site by the deceased? I'll wait.
There was no burglary. You cannot prove intent to commit a crime while inside the structure. It's literally impossible to prove. And again, the two fat idiots did not witness a felony and they had no immediate knowledge of a felony being committed by Arbery. So please, again, you're embarrassing yourself here. It's getting awkward that you keep copying and pasting legal passages that literally have zero to do with this case. I, for one, am very glad you decided to pursue a profession other than law. I hope you were successful at whatever that was.
I’m acting like a child and you cant get basic definitions right.
Try again. You clearly are STILL confused on what a burglary is.
Please show me where he pointed the gun at him. I’ll wait.
Moving the goal post after being proven wrong?. Nice.
"with the intent to commit a felony or theft therein"
You see that little phrase? That's the important phrase. You need to enter unlawfully AND ALSO COMMIT ANOTHER CRIME WHILE INSIDE THE DWELLING. Arbery entered unlawfully, stood around, and ran out. There was no other crime committed in the dwelling.
Now, do you understand what a burglary is?
Where is your proof they didn’t witness a crime?
This keeps getting better. Now she's asking people to prove negatives. You FreeRepublic wanna-be lawyers are hilarious.
Prove he DIDN'T witness a crime, indeed. Hilarious!
Well YOU CLAIMED IT.... AFTER it was proven to you over and the dude COMMITTED A CRIME. did they witness it? They were right there. But you don’t know if they did or didn’t. So stop claiming something you don’t know!
You can stop with the condescention.
All the mcmichaels needed was PROBABLE CAUSE that a burglary occurred. Understand? They WITNESS him entering through the back yard into the house and take off running like his butt’s on fire out the front.
THAT’S probable cause. Please dont get snippy with me because you don’t understand how things work.
And no you don’t have to commit a crime inside a dwelling for it to be burglary.
I'll being with this statement of yours: "And no you don’t have to commit a crime inside a dwelling for it to be burglary."
Then what, dear madam, is criminal trespass? If simply standing in a dwelling unlawfully constitutes felony burglary, then criminal trespass shouldn't exist. Correct?
I would address the difference between reasonable suspicion, probable cause, and other standards of proof but that's not the point here.
The real point is that you're confusing what civilians can do with what sworn police officers can do. Civilians need to witness a crime being committed in order to effect an arrest. Officers can arrest if they have probable cause to do so. Cops do not need to see the crime take place, obviously.
I'm sorry that the facts of this case don't match up to your perceptions, but that's the way it goes. It's silly to argue. If you follow the case you'll begin to see why what these two men did was the antithesis of lawful. They will never see the light of day again.
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.