Posted on 11/24/2021 10:28:00 AM PST by janetjanet998
The jury has reached a verdict in the trial of Travis McMichael and his father, Gregory, and their neighbor, William "Roddie" Bryan.
The three men, who are white, each face charges of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, false imprisonment and criminal attempt to commit a felony in the shooting death of Ahmaud Arbery, 25, who was Black, on Feb. 23, 2020, in Georgia.
They face up to life in prison if convicted of the more serious charges.
The nearly all-white jury, which has one Black member, began deliberating the men's fate on Tuesday.
Did they go after him to deliberately murder him?
The biggest mistake was open carrying. I realize with a rifle that’s your only choice. But I think this would have been a little different if he had been conceal carrying instead.
Most would not be convicted. Usually, the exculpatory statements made by a suspect trying to wriggle away are more than half the case the prosecution has to prove. Like, “yes, that is my car but I wasn’t driving it.”
I attended a trial where a very skilled defense attorney made the prosecutor spend three days trying to prove that a car with a license plate registered to the defendant was actually his car. The title people would not come to court and the little fact alone made a mess of the entire trial.
Like a lot of people here, I’m in favor of the principle that the jury can decide the law as well as the facts (as it applies to a particular case).
I said before that the best defense for these guys was the LAW which permits civilians to detain a suspect under certain circumstances. That was their best defense because the facts in the case were not as good for them as the law.
But I can see that they jury could reasonably conclude that the law was being parsed by the defense to avoid the facts, and could JUDGE the law, as is their right, to be invalid under these particular circumstances.
I support the right to keep AND TO BEAR arms, but in the course of bearing arms, someone winds up dead, you are going to face a judge and sometimes a jury, and it happens that they don’t see things your way.
This was a close call. If they chased Arbery after he was found over a dead body with a bloody knife in his hand, they would not have been found guilty. If they caught him with stolen goods, they might not have been found guilty. But trespassing? If he went away in handcuffs and they were charged with brandishing or assault, they might walk.
But blowing his head off after uttering a threat to do that over a trespassing charge (on someone else’s property)? Guilty 99 times out of 100.
Stupid? Like the parade murderer?
Same. Agree 100%.
Yes. I haven’t followed this case closely. All I remember is the original video when the story first broke.
These were the charges the defendants faced: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/05/us/charges-arbery-killing-trial-defendants.html
That says both malice murder and felony murder could be death sentences.
Good post.
Makes it clearer to me.
The things you say here are factually incorrect.
Didn’t the cops tell the neighbor to call mcmichael if they spotted Arbery because mcmichael was former LE?
Oh, nose! Break out your pointy hoods and sheets. Race riots!/s
I think so.
If Aubrey had a gun, things might have been different. Or if he was running carrying a Skilsaw, or some loot, things would have been different.
But he was basically a guy who was snooping around - not a death penalty crime at all.
The going after him in the truck with a shotgun in their posession after he ran off was the part they shouldn't have done. That's the police's job.
If they wanted to kill him, then why did he wait until Arbery attacked him?
The fact a judge let that happen in his/her courtroom is the real reason that trial became a mess. I’d call that a piss-poor judge.
You misrepresent the defense.
Travis McMichael did not claim the shooting was justified in order to detain a burglar.
McMichael said Arbery grabbed McMichael’s gun and struck him in the head repeatedly so he fired in self defense.
Our jury system works and delivered a just verdict in this case. BLM rioters and the lame stream media were all ready to scream racism and start the burning of cities but I expect now crickets.
Didn’t he “have” the gun at one time?
First, I absolutely concur with this verdict but Trespassing? Being in Real Estate for thirty years, I have to say, I have “trespassed” hundreds of times into homes under construction, as have my clients and many other potential buyers. The builders love it because they want to sell it or get a prospective custom build. People love going into houses, under construction and open, I don’t know why but they do. But not once has a neighbor ever questioned me or called the police.
This case is about when your actions waive the privilege of self defense, when you lose what the law calls "innocence" as one of the elements that prove self-defense.
It is well within the scope of a jury to conclude that threatening to blow a guy's head off and then doing exactly that constitutes waiving the privilege.
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.