All 3 men guilty of murder in the killing of Ahmaud Arbery

Name one felony that you could commit against some one in which it would be justifiable for you to use lethal force against them for defending themselves against the felony you are perpetrating.

 

Tulsi Gabbard on Twitter: "Jury in the Arbery case got it right, as did the jury in Rittenhouse case. Jurors (average Americans) had the intelligence and honesty to make the right decision based on evidence—not race or politics. This undermines the ‘woke’ narrative that Americans are stupid and racists." / Twitter

 

Yard, don't bother. Check that posting history. She/he/it/whatever said that everyone molested by Catholic priests deserved it since they got settlements in the end. That's WAY beyond <censoring myself>. Just save yourself the bandwidth man. That's a lost cause with a side of <censoring myself>.

 

Please tell us what felony those three were actually in the process of perpetrating when Arbery was "defending himself", and please tell us how Arbery's actions were necessary or reasonable to "defend himself" in that situation.

It seems they were chasing him down, following him, while carrying guns, and they also cut off his path in the middle of the road with their truck as he was running away.

That doesn't sound like the typical sort of "felony" that we all obviously agree persons would not have any right to self defense in.

 

You are taking this way off topic.
Those people who got those settlements are thieves. The issue isn't whether they "deserve the money" but whether the entity that was made to pay them that money deserves to have to pay that money.
I simply pointed out that what those victims did could actually be seen as even worse than what was done to them that made them victims in the first place.

 

It's off topic, but here's one:
another freedom taken away: "Resisting Arrest"

Another example could be someone unknowingly committing a felony, when it was not obvious to them that they were breaking the law.

 

I was thankful for the other one. I never expected less on this one but I thought there was a real chance that anti gun emotions would rule in the Rittenhouse case.

 

It was, not in the south, but the rest of the civilized world it was better much better.

 

Those who think these three men are guilty have to ask themselves a question:
If it was plain murder what these men did, why would it not also be murder if police did that, in this exact same situation?


I think when you can see that, this is not so simple.

 

I think today an officer in the same situation might be charged too. A body cam showing he was at risk would be the only thing that might save him.

 

I am glad that Justice was done for Arbury who wasn't doing anything that was serious or dangerous to the area that day.

 

You can't insult your way out of this one because Arbury was unarmed and not a threat to the area that day. Skin color is IRRELEVANT, it is their actions that matters and my gosh the three men grossly overreacted to Arbury's unarmed presence who gets shot in the middle of the street.

The Jury knows more than you do and you have yet to make a rational argument in the killers favor.

 

Isn't the idea that it wasn't deemed a justified citizens arrest, meaning that they couldn't legitimately claim self-defense, even if in other circumstances, someone grabbing someone's gun would legally allow the gun holder to shoot and kill?

 

I'm fine with the verdict.

 

I understand how the shooter can be charged with murder, but how the hell can the other two be charged with murder?

 

good

 

In states with felony murder laws, you can be charged with murder if someone dies during your commission of a felony, whether you shoot them yourself of not.

 

Yes, and the local police sat on the case until they had no choice (video). That's half the crime here.

 

"felony murder." if you are involved in any felony and someone dies it is the same as if you committed the murder. if a bank guard, for example, shoots a bank robber who later dies, the get away driver is guilty of murder. if an aging bank customer has a heart attack the entire gang is charged with felony murder.

 

Yes it is that simple.

It is a universal principal of western jurisprudence that unless acting under the authority of a court order or arrest warrant etc Police Officers may only arrest someone if they have reasonable grounds to suspect the person in question has or is in the process of committing a crime. (Yes, citizens also have the power to make arrests but that power generally only extends to detaining the person in question before transferring them into Police custody asap.)

Note the underlined section. The offenders in this case did not have reasonable grounds to believe the victim had committed a crime. This means all their interactions with Mr Arbery from the moment he was stopped and one of them laid hands on him were illegal. And they're all guilty because the 'arrest was a joint enterprise'.

The fact a retired Police Officer was involved only makes it worse. He should have known better. And if he'd still been in the force when this happened even if Mr Arbery wasn't killed at the very least he would have been fired and his department sued.

One last thing. If your going to insist on believing the actions of these felons concerned were justified and that you'd do the same thing in similar circumstances then I can only advise as follows.

Before grabbing whatever items you think may be necessary while making this 'arrest' I also suggest you pack one other thing. Your cheque book. Because when the dust finally settles after your 'citizens arrest' you will find yourself writing a lot of cheques. One to the court for your fine. A larger one to the lawyer who resented you and finally one (with lots of zeros in it ) to the victim of your 'arrest'. And that's assuming no-one was hurt.

 

He made the choice that he knew would probably result in him getting shot.

Maybe he wasn't thinking clearly due to emotions.

It was dangerous to try to run at one of those men and attempt to ambush them, suddenly appearing from around the corner of the truck.

 

Your argument seems to be based entirely on a literal interpretation of the law, rather than ordinary logic or commonsense.

You haven't explained what felony was being committed that Arbery acted in self defense in.

Like you have been told over and over again, they had not really begun attempting to arrest him yet at that point in time, so even your legal logic may not actually hold.

Even if some felony were actually committed, it is likely that not all three of those men should be seen as being involved in that specific felony.
(Group responsibility does not apply if individuals entered the situation without attempt to commit an action that was classified as a felony)

 

And what was the felony?

 

And what is the felonly in this case?

 

It turns out that I know nothing about the law. These guys were charged with multiple counts. I always thought that a second count of murder would mean a second murder.