Posted on 11/24/2021 5:36:25 PM PST by HogsBreath
i understand that he was on probation. a lot of people do stupid stuff to keep from going back to jail.
it seems there was plenty of stupid to go around
my understanding is that because they failed to meet the requirements of a citizen’s arrest they also failed the self defense test.
agree. i checked the live-in boyfriend of my ex cuz my son stayed there on weekends.
found a gun charge. had him booted by the court.
“...and someone has a gun and telling you to stay put until the cops arrive, would you charge the person with the gun and attempt to disarm them?”
There was a video out shortly after the Arbury event iirc where the police pull over a black guy that fit the description of some suspect. (Some say it was mainly because he was black, but...)
The guy was very polite, quiet and understood. Although iirc he did keep saying he was going to be late picking up his child from school.
Turns out he was innocent, and the cops apologized and thanked him. Only then did he say something like “I get it, I was Military Police once.” The police hired him part-time.
the 7 items mentioned on legal insurrection could be grounds for appeal.
it could help their citizens arrest claim
he was on probation. he may have feared being violated.
It is illegal for a civilian to detain somebody over a suspected crime.
You can’t shoot them if they try and run.
They did not witness a crime. They were merely suspicious that one had been committed. They lost contact and control of the person they suspected of a crime and hence lost the right to make a citizens arrest
Nice try though. The prosecutor addressed all of this in closing arguments
That’s not true either. Civilians detain people all the time, but they must only use an appropriate level of force.
Depends on what counts as evidence in your eyes. Their partner-in-crime, Roddy Bryan, testified to the police that he did. So sure the attorney denies that McMichael said it; doesn't make him look very good. It's a he said/she said situation which may or may not have been completely in character for McMichael. Regardless, the prosecution felt confident enough in the evidence to want to introduce it during the trial but the judge denied it.
They jury disagrees with you that the proportional amount of force for the resistance offered was used.
Well, I guess we don’t. Everyone know juries never get anything wrong.
Exactly. Arbery was engaged in self defense, just like Rittenhouse. Let’s be consistent here.
Based on the facts of the case, I don’t disagree with the jury.
I work in security. The less force used, the more optimal it is. If the guy had taken something and given it back, it is better that he was free to go. Since he did not take anything, the best action was to tell him to get lost.
A lot of trouble could have been saved if they had a couple of hi-def video cameras. He was well known enough that the police would have tracked him down and talked to him.
The 'obviously thieving individual' who hadn't stolen anything?
So, you commit a crime (based on my understanding one of the guys saw him come out of a house he did not belong in) neighbors try to stop you, you assault them, and that is self defense?
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.