Survivalist Forum banner
  • Are you passionate about survivalism? Would you like to write about topics that interest you and get paid for it? Read all about it here!
21 - 40 of 76 Posts

·
Live Secret, Live Happy
Joined
·
16,767 Posts
From what I have seen of this case, the property owner had the right to confront a tresspasser they thought was stealing from the house under construction. Confront means challenging them, and ordering them to leave without stealing anything.

If the tresspasser runs away thats considered a win. If he refuses to leave you call the police. If he threatens you on your own property, the homeowner can use deadly force to protect themselves.

What they do not have the right to do was persue the tresspasser off the property (unless they clearly committed a felony like kidnapping). Once the take one step off their property, they loose any legal protection, and now they became the aggressor.

Hard to say since I did not see all the evidence, but I think the jury got this case right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
738 Posts
If anything, their inability to keep their mouths shut is what got them convicted.
The younger guy and son of the ex cop gave a statement to the police within hours of the shooting and also gave a written statement. I believe that is a major reason why he was convicted. Everyone has there own way of thinking. Mine is never ever talk to the cops, ever. Exercise your 5A right and talk to a lawyer first before ever answering questions or giving a statement.

I don't have enough of the facts of the case or enough knowledge of Georgia law to render my own decision on guilt or innocents.

The optics of the case and of course the media makes the shooting look very bad for the three men charged. That doesn't mean they are guilty but it didn't look good as others have eluded to in this thread. The real question for me is whether or not the victim should have tried to grab the gun from the younger man. I can see it both ways. He shouldn't have but may have felt it was his best course of action. It could have been. I am not sure.

The three guys should have called the cops and let the cops have direct contact with the runner. Maybe they could have followed but I think getting out of the truck in such close proximity of the victim was a huge mistake. They should have stayed back and let the cops handle it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,132 Posts
The verdict in the Rittenhouse was correct, and the verdict in this case is correct.
Before anyone objects to the verdict in this case, allow me to add the following:

11 of the 12 jurors were white.



The final panel selected in the trial over Ahmaud Arbery's death consists of 12 jurors: Nine white women, two white men and one Black man – a demographic makeup that has drawn scrutiny in a case several public figures have called a "lynching." Three others – two white women and a white man – served as alternates.

The 12-person jury consists of at least two retired law enforcement officers, a former nurse and a clinician. Another has a background in psychology.

Several said they previously served on a jury. Four indicated they own firearms. Four said they believe police do not treat white and Black people equally. Four said they have lived in Glynn County for less than five years. Nearly all said they'd seen the video of the killing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,132 Posts
This is simply a case that they threw to the mob. Praying for those guys. They were 110% justified is shooting him. The public perception HAS to change. The idea that someone can destroy your livelihood or take what you worked for, and you can only defend yourself if you are on your back about to die. It's BS.
Read post #26. I seriously hope you are being facetious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,132 Posts
Posting the video on line sunk them. They were cleared up to that stupid move. Bragging never did anybody any good. I am sure their lawyer wanted to bitch slap the idiot who posted it..
Like I said in an earlier post; they couldn't keep their mouths shut.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
Racism strong in this one
3 white men chased and assassinated a black man who was not committing a crime, watched him bleed out on the ground and called him an effin n word...Interesting how this case triggers posts about black violence because he dared fight back after being cornered, I quote McMichael senior : "We had him trapped like a rat".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,403 Posts
The younger guy and son of the ex cop gave a statement to the police within hours of the shooting and also gave a written statement. I believe that is a major reason why he was convicted. Everyone has there own way of thinking. Mine is never ever talk to the cops, ever. Exercise your 5A right and talk to a lawyer first before ever answering questions or giving a statement.

I don't have enough of the facts of the case or enough knowledge of Georgia law to render my own decision on guilt or innocents.

The optics of the case and of course the media makes the shooting look very bad for the three men charged. That doesn't mean they are guilty but it didn't look good as others have eluded to in this thread. The real question for me is whether or not the victim should have tried to grab the gun from the younger man. I can see it both ways. He shouldn't have but may have felt it was his best course of action. It could have been. I am not sure.

The three guys should have called the cops and let the cops have direct contact with the runner. Maybe they could have followed but I think getting out of the truck in such close proximity of the victim was a huge mistake. They should have stayed back and let the cops handle it.
Exactly. The police exist for a reason. Stay back, gather info until the cops get there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,711 Posts
Their biggest problem was that they required direct and immediate knowledge of an felonious act on the part of Arberry to have grounds for a citizens arrest.

Thats a higher standard than cops have to follow.

Since they didnt have that the attempt to detain him is basically kidnapping. So they run into felony murder.

Malice murder is the only sketchy conviction though.
 

·
Weed 'em and reap
Joined
·
31,317 Posts
Surprised I haven't seen a thread on this. Anyway, the verdict is in.


Not pleased with how the media is portraying it but, thoughts on the verdict?
It has been said that in the Rittenhouse case, self defense was on trial. In this case, it is the hue and cry that was on trial. And in this case, the proxy defendant lost.

Did the jury arrive at the correct conclusion based on the facts and evidence? Maybe. But by allowing the case to be about the right / responsibility of the people to raise the alarm and interdict felons (the so-called "citizen's arrest"), we were forced to choose between justice in the instant case, on the one hand, and the capacity to accommodate justice in the future, on the other.

That is to say, our statute law is not arbitrary. We actually have very little control over it. We can not mandate by fiat that which is against the natural law and still have a law that is wholesome. It calls to mind the time that a particularly backward state declared pi to be equal to 3. No amount of enforcement could ever make it so.

The same is true of our statutes regarding the right and responsibility of the people to raise the hue and cry. Without the hue and cry, justice is not possible and the statute finds itself at odds with the common law and natural law. The very foundation of our law becomes self-defeating.

We must be careful to scold those who insist on conflating the missteps of the perpetrators in this case with all who seek to interdict violent felons they encounter in their own personal experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts
If you grew up around any Blacks you'd understand how volatile they are when confronted, why would they fight cops when they get stopped for a minor violation.....because it's their nature even if not guilty of anything. Thug mentality.
Your statement reeks of racism.
I am white, and a corrections officer. I have never found it in an African Americans nature to fight law enforcement, and 99% of my contacts have been found guilty. I also grew up around African Americans and a few of them are good friends.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
The younger guy and son of the ex cop gave a statement to the police within hours of the shooting and also gave a written statement. I believe that is a major reason why he was convicted. Everyone has there own way of thinking. Mine is never ever talk to the cops, ever. Exercise your 5A right and talk to a lawyer first before ever answering questions or giving a statement.

I don't have enough of the facts of the case or enough knowledge of Georgia law to render my own decision on guilt or innocents.

The optics of the case and of course the media makes the shooting look very bad for the three men charged. That doesn't mean they are guilty but it didn't look good as others have eluded to in this thread. The real question for me is whether or not the victim should have tried to grab the gun from the younger man. I can see it both ways. He shouldn't have but may have felt it was his best course of action. It could have been. I am not sure.

The three guys should have called the cops and let the cops have direct contact with the runner. Maybe they could have followed but I think getting out of the truck in such close proximity of the victim was a huge mistake. They should have stayed back and let the cops handle it.
That's why the lawyers for the three accused questioned the cops who responded and then the ones who held the interviews as to why they didn't give the men their Miranda rights. The accused' lawyers were trying to get the statements excluded. The cops used the "they weren't suspects at that time" angle. When you consider that there was an unarmed dead man surrounded by three men, two of them armed and covered with blood and one of them taking responsibility for the killing, it's difficult to believe that the cops didn't consider one of them a suspect. That's one reason the DA is being indicted for obstructing the investigation. Seems that most of the locals are in CYOA mode to try to keep their jobs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Back when the demonstrations and riots first started, several elected officials mainly in the southern US started talking about shooting any troublemakers that came into their neighborhoods. There are lots of people on social media who hear something like that and take it seriously instead of realizing that it's mostly loud mouthed politicians who are blowing smoke to ensure that they get reelected so they can pass out jobs and contracts to their wives, girlfriends, boyfriends, relatives and anyone else who sucks up to them. The guy with the shotgun had a social media post that said that his goal was to "High Point" a **** that had gold teeth, drove a Caddilac, and smoked Newports. One of the reasons he couldn't get a lower bond and spent the the whole time locked up instead of participating in his defense fully. Gotta be careful of what you say either on or off line.
 
21 - 40 of 76 Posts
Top