Posted on 11/24/2021 5:36:25 PM PST by HogsBreath
There were five key arguments the court ruled could not be presented to the 12-juror panel who will decide the fate of the three white men charged They included Arbery's mental health records and criminal history, and the fact that trace amounts of THC were found in his blood after his death The judge also refused evidence claiming Arbery was known as 'The Jogger' because he would jog to convenience stores, and run out with stolen goods
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
I doubt the attorney would say that if there is proof otherwise. I take this statement to mean there is no proof.
It was pointed out on another website by an attorney discussing the case that none of the racist claims were brought up in the trial, but the charges alleged such a claim.
He said this is often a dirty trick a lawyer pulls to get the case into court where the prosecution can beat on the defendant for awhile, but doesn't have to prove the claim that was the basis for filing the case in the first place.
Now we can see that one of the reasons no such claims were made was because the judge didn't allow it. Since the Defense attorney denies his client said it, and since that probably means there is no evidence that his client said it, the only evidence they could have must be social media messages or some such.
Then he told me about what the lawyers discussed. Seems she had several similar felony arrests and convictions over the same issues. But the judge did t allow us to hear the evidence!
I have often remarked that they expect people to weigh all the factors and render a verdict, but insist on with holding information from them as if they don't trust them to be reasonable.
If they aren't reasonable, why do you trust them to render a verdict? If they are reasonable, why do you with hold information from them?
A year or so ago when this case broke into the public consciousness, I had read that the elder McMichael was involved in a case with Arbery. It may be the one where he brought the gun to school. If this is true, you think it is unreasonable that the guy who actually worked a case involving Arbery shouldn't be allowed to know about Arbery's record?
Attacking a man with a shotgun and punching him in the face while trying to wrest the gun away from him is not a crime worth taking a life over?
So if someone punches you in the face and tries to take a shotgun away from you, I suppose you will conclude that he hasn't committed a crime worth the trouble for you to pull a trigger?
That's assuming McMichael actually pulled the trigger rather than that idiot pulling the gun forward against McMichael's hand thereby activating the trigger.
“People’s rap sheets are not readily available to the public.”
Yep, criminal records are top secret. That’s why you can click on this link and see everybody in the Mobile County Jail (Alabama) and their charges. There is so much misinformation going on these days it’s just amazing. Why would you think that? Criminal records are generally public information.
https://www.mobileso.com/24-hour-booking/
Not allowing the jury to hear details of a person's criminal record is a miscarriage of justice, especially if it shows a pattern of behavior/aggression of the person on trial, or if the individual was killed while acting aggressive, etc.
I worked in uniform in New York State prison system for 25 years. I'm a female. One older hispanic inmate at Auburn prison who was doing time for rape, would repeatedly try to converse with me, and other female officers. This was in the 80's. We knew what his crime was, and didn't want the asshole anywhere near us, and we'd tell him to get lost. He filed a lawsuit against me, and another female officer, claiming we'd taken his Bible away from him, and wouldn't let him pray in the yard. Of course, none of it was true. I didn't play those kind of games with the inmates. Eventually the case went to trial, and we were told that we couldn't introduce the fact that the convict was doing time for rape. When I got on the stand, I was asked by the State's Attorney why I thought this inmate had a grudge against us, and so I proceeded to explain that he was doing time for rape, and obviously had animosity toward women in general. His Attorney immediately asked that my comment be struck from the record. I didn't care, because the jury had heard it, and it took them all of 10 minutes to deny him his win in court.
I spent a little over three years at Auburn, until I was able to transfer back closer to home. Sometime prior to my leaving that facility, I was working a yard post one evening, and noticed this same inmate looking agitated, walking back and forth in front of the fence that separated the yard from the alley that led up to the Administration building. After watching him for a while, I called the Sergeant's post, and let them know that he was acting very strangely. He had a habit of talking to himself regularly, and he was doing that on this evening. They sent some officers to check him out, and when they frisked him, they found a shank on him. I'm sure he's dead by now. I only hope he died in prison, and in a lot of pain.
So you don't think the fat body of the younger McMichael fellow was in any danger from a deranged psychotic trying to take a shotgun away from him?
You do understand that having a thug run at you and punching you in the head while trying to rip the gun out of your hands would constitute a threat of bodily harm or death?
Yup. They should have *NEVER* tried to stop a black guy for suspicion of committing a crime. Had they just picked a white guy, it would have been fine.
“You do understand that having a thug run at you and punching you in the head while trying to rip the gun out of your hands would constitute a threat of bodily harm or death?”
You do understand that having 3 men chase you down with a pick up truck carrying weapons would constitute a threat of bodily harm or death?
The judge barred them from entering it.
It’s not relevant to the prosecution case, or the specific crime. Did the shooters know this? I doubt it.
One shooter, and I read last year that the elder McMichael worked a case involving Arbery. I have also read that Arbery was known to the police and they were looking for him and had been circulating his picture.
I don’t see how that is relevant to the case. It did not cause the defendants to suspect the man they killed. All that is relevant is why they chased him down, attempted to detain him, and why they shot him.
Indefensible to confront him in that situation. Should have called the police. Not defending the obviously thieving individual, but THAT was not the way to handle a theft case.
even more info suppressed by the ‘judge’...
Nope. Stop right there. In the video we see Arbery running *TOWARD* them. They were stationary, *HE* was chasing them. Had he been afraid of them, he could have ran the other direction.
with a pick up truck carrying weapons would constitute a threat of bodily harm or death?
No it wouldn't, because I have been around men with pickups and guns and it constituted no threat to me whatsoever.
Of course I didn't try to punch one of them in the face and attempt to take his gun away from him either.
Arbery's regular behavior was either running away after committing a crime, or acting aggressively if confronted about convenience store thefts. He brought a gun to school in 2013, and ran away from the cops when confronted. His own mother called 911 on him when he took her car keys. The article says he was on probation for two crimes at the time of his death. The guy should have stayed in his own neighborhood, but liked to wander, and browse the neighborhoods he went to. When confronted by the three men, he initially ran, but when they caught up to him, he acted aggressively. Because the criminal justice system sucks, I doubt Arbery ever did any serious time for any of the crimes he committed. And when criminals aren't forced to accept responsibility for their crimes, they get emboldened.
Symmetry: Three vigilantes who mistakenly thought they were justified in their unlawful attacks were brought to justice. Both times. But of course it’s better when the person dispensing that justice is the intended victim.
So what were they doing? Just driving down the street minding their business when attacked by a lone, unarmed 20-something?
gtfoh with that. The defendants themselves never claimed that and actually said they were chasing him down trying to arrest him, and called him racially offensive names.
Pick another hill to die on.
The lone guy shot him because Arbery assaulted him and attempted to wrest the gun away from him. They did not chase him down, they waited for him at the exit to the neighborhood. They attempted to detain him because he was known to them as a serial trespasser into the house that had been burglarized and was therefore suspected to be involved in other burglaries that had been occurring in the neighborhood.
This is why they knew who he was and thought he needed to be detained until police arrived.
“Arbery pleaded guilty to charges that he carried a gun onto a high school campus in 2013, a year after he graduated. Rodney Ellis, police chief for the Glynn County school system, testified at Wednesday’s hearing that Arbery tried to evade officers on foot and stopped only when two of them pointed guns at him.
“He was also arrested in 2017 on charges that he tried to steal a TV from a Walmart. Court records show he pleaded guilty to shoplifting. Arbery was on probation at the time of his death.”
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.