Posted on 05/22/2020 10:01:06 AM PDT by conservative98
The director of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said Friday that William Bryan, the neighbor who filmed Ahmaud Arbery's death, was not a good Samaritan or simply a witness as Bryan has claimed, but a significant player in the February killing of the unarmed black man.
"If we believed he was a witness, we wouldn't have arrested him," GBI Director Vic Reynolds said Friday. "There's probable cause and we're comfortable with that."
Bryan, who filmed the four-minute chase and shooting death of Arbery, was arrested Thursday evening.
The 50-year-old was taken into custody and charged with felony murder and criminal attempt to commit false imprisonment. Two other men, Gregory McMichael, 64, and Travis McMichael, 34, allegedly went after Arbery, trapped and shot him four times. They were arrested on charges of felony murder and criminal attempt to commit false imprisonment earlier this month.
Bryan, who is white, recorded the Feb. 23 confrontation as the McMichaels – who are also white – pursued Arbery while he was running through the Satilla Shores neighborhood, about 25 minutes away from downtown Brunswick.
"We don't go into a situation of this nature investigating a person or persons, we go in and investigate a set of facts and once we start turning stones over — sometimes there's one or two stones underneath that need to be turned over," Reynolds said.
In Georgia, a person can be charged with felony murder if he or she is alleged to have contributed to another person's death, even unintentionally, while committing another felony.
Reynolds also said that state investigators had found "a number of pieces of video" that linked Bryan to the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Since so far there’s no real indication that he had probable cause to believe the decedent was fleeing from a burglary the decedent had just committed, I’d recommend that he not use a gun to try to stop the decedent, since its mere use could be deemed an attempted false imprisonment, thereby allowing the decedent to attempt to disarm him.
It could be like the trial of the policemen who beat up Rodney King. If the first jury doesn’t produce the right verdict, they can always try the defendants again on some other charge until they get the right verdict.
He will be the defendant at his own trial.His lawyer will probably fight to keep him off the witness stand.
Sorry. I can't remember who's on what side, and whether people are being serious or not. The GBI is full of sh*t, and this is nothing but a politically motivated arrest, and the GBI knows it though they won't admit it.
"False Imprisonment" is a ridiculous, Soviet style accusation. It bears no resemblance to what happened.
:-)
I would not doubt that for a minute. In either of their places, I would be yelling at my lawyer, Make a deal. Make a deal.
Disagree. Since your entire house of cards relies on this thin foundation, if someone establishes that Georgia Law allows "probable cause" for suspicion of burglary based on trespassing, then your house of cards falls.
And Georgia Law does.
And this I believe.
Way back in the day, I read about the trial of the policemen in the Rodney King incident. The prosecutor made a huge blunder right from the beginning. He charged the cops with something like "attempted murder", which under no circumstances would the evidence support, and of course the Jury had no choice but to find them "not guilty."
Had he charged them with some supportable lesser offense, he could have likely gotten a conviction.
I see the same circumstances playing out in this case. They are going to over charge them, and the evidence will not support the allegations against them.
And you are likely right. The Feds might step in and flip the verdict using their special "double jeopardy" trial.
One reason I joined FR, aside from the volume and quality of knowledge of the posters, was the “get all the facts” attitude. People would dig and burrow for facts but wouldn’t form hard opinions until the facts were known.
Seems that is somewhat missing these days.
It's natural for people to defend people who look like them.
The problem here is the trespassing was in an unfinished house where there could be no breaking and entering. There’s also no indication that he stole anything.
They do not have the authority to arrest and hold the guy. He may have been guilty of something, but these guys were way out of line.
I don't think there is a specification in the law that the home has to be finished. People may be reading that into the law, but that is not actually in the law.
There’s also no indication that he stole anything.
There are plenty of indications that he stole something. There are three reported thefts, and they have video of him in the house at night as well as reports of seeing him in between the houses at night.
He's a thief, and the evidence will demonstrate this.
The bleating on this thread is deafening.
Read this (post 170) for some proper perspective.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3847340/posts
Project democrat distraction is in full force.
“Travis, Greg and William are stepping over each other to make the best deal with the DA.”
Do you honestly think the father is trying to make the best deal for himself at the expense of his son?
If so, how do you know this?
The reason I ask: it sounds like something you made up.
“Do you honestly think the father is trying to make the best deal for himself at the expense of his son?”
Each has different interests in the case, and adding Mr. Bryan to to the mix puts additional pressure on both Greg and Travis.
The pressure is everywhere. The state prosecutor in this case just responded to additional pressure from the Rev. Benjamin Crump, the family of the deceased, the Rightful Governor Stacey Abrams, CNN, and Tom Brady.
Time will tell if the Benjamin Crump narrative will hold up under expert testimony and cross examination.
I agree... but be careful there Bryan.
You're making FAR TOO MUCH SENSE.
They'll be attacking you like the MSM attacks Trump because he's "right" and they don't want to hear that.
“Time will tell if the Benjamin Crump narrative will hold up under expert testimony and cross examination.”
Crump will not be on trial, he will not be on a witness list.
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.