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

What actions?

 

It seems that running through the neighborhood is a "threat" to some people . Made a lot worse if your black .......and misidentified as some criminal



This was wrong on so many levels it is astounding. A lot f erroneous assumptions made by the proverbial "red neck " mentality......which likes to take the law into its own hands........ and believe they are "heroes"

 

Well, I guess they either had different roles or the grand jury thought that they did.

 

I'd heard the prosecutor was backing off of the jogging claim if for no other reason, given the other facts of the case, it was not relevant.

 

What's the justification for chasing down an obviously empty-handed jogger?

Of course he didn't stop ... three white men, two of them armed? If you were black, you'd run too.

He should have gotten back in daddy's truck and driven away, if he was that scared of an unarmed guy. What a sissy.

Accessories to murder. Basic Pre-law 101.

They chased him because he was black, he was running, and they thought they'd seen his face at a nearby construction site. They had no plan to wait for law enforcement -- their intent was to force him to stop and confront them. They pointed guns at him. I would run, too, if men in pickup trucks pulled up on me with weapons in hand.

They all deserve to spend the rest of their miserable lives in prison.

 

Reasoned and very well stated. Bravo !!

 

Well, NO. It would have been self defense. Threatening someone with deadly force allows them to defend themselves.........with deadly force.

( If Kyle was justified, then so would have been this .....)

 

Do aggressors have a claim to self defense? These guys admitted they chase him around the block trying to trap him. If a bunch of my friends corner a guy to try and goad him into attacking us, then shoot him as he fights us, can I claim self defense? Seems like it would open pandoras box to legal murder.

 

And you'd be completely correct. No, aggressors have no right to claim self defense, as the state did a great job of explaining to the jury during the trial.

They also admitted at the time that they had not witnessed him commit a crime that day and had no probable cause for believing he did so. They didn't even claim at the time that they were attempting a citizen's arrest. Instead, at the time they claimed they were trying to physically prevent him from moving so that they could question him about his identity, where he was coming from, and what he was doing. None of which is legal.

 

If there is a next time, What are the chances of getting caught? Chances are more likely of getting caught than getting away with it.

 

Depends on a lot. The Arbery case is aggravating in that, he could have put up his hands, asked, "WTF?" and talked with these guys. And then pressed charges against them later. But I don't think he was legally obligated to do so.

Suppose Arbery had put up his hands. They converse. Satisfied, the 3 white guys turn away and start leaving (which didn't happen: this is a hypothetical). Arbery then leaps on one of the people leaving. He would have known the danger is past. Their transgressions are no longer proximate to Arbery attacking them. So, they would have had rights against him then.

 

Yes. None of them said they told Arbery he was under arrest. Imagine being hit by a truck and chased for 5 minutes by people with guns, and the expectation is that you stop and talk to them.

I guess we should all be obligated to talk to people who try to kidnap us rather than flee.

By the way, why didn't they call 911 immediately? They chased him for 5 minutes but didn't call for police until shortly before they shot him. They knew his location for 4 minutes but didn't alert police and instead focused on trapping him.

 

Weren't you saying that a "count" is one crime?

 

In this particular case, each count alleged one crime, and I've never seen two crimes alleged in one count, though I don't remember saying that way.

It can be the same crime (murder, for example) committed under more than one provision of the penal code. For example, if someone is raped vaginally and then anally within one minute, those are two separate offenses, but they have the same name: "rape," or in some states, "aggravated sexual assault."

The D.A. in that case would charge two separate counts of rape and the jury would be instructed to consider each one individually. The jury might be sure of one, but not the other.

Same with murder: if you batter someone with a deadly weapon and then set the house on fire, and he dies, the D.A. would charge at least two counts of felony murder, plus maybe vanilla murder. It's not because he wants you to get a longer sentence necessarily, but because he doesn't know how his witnesses will do at trial, and he wants the jury to have as many tools as possible to find you guilty, even though there's only one victim.

 

Mercy is a punishment issue, not a guilt versus innocent issue.

If you shoot at a security camera during a robbery, not intending to hurt anyone, but the bullet ricochets and hits a customer or the clerk, resulting in death, you'll be charge with robbery AND felony murder. The jury will likely convict you of both assuming the evidence proves it.

You're right that you can argue that that's not as heinous as intentionally killing someone, but the jury decides whether to give the shooter a break or not. If it's an automatic life sentence either way (intentional versus felony murder) per the laws of the state, there's nothing to argue about at sentencing.

I say "the jury" ... But I usually ask the judge, not the jury, to set punishment in the event of a conviction, if I know him to be fair. If a jury finds the defendant guilty, they may give him the maximum. Some lawyers disagree with me, but the client/defendant gets to make that call.

 

What people in Louisiana call The (French) Napoleonic Code is the basis for civil law in that state (negligence, succession, partnerships, torts). The penal code in Louisiana was, I think, independently developed and not based on French law.

Anyway, shooting one person 5 times, resulting in death, is just one murder, in every state, including Georgia and Louisiana.

I've explained above why there were several different counts in the Georgia case.

 

So do we know what each count of Felony murder corresponds to in this case?

 

Yes we do. But no one's going to spoonfeed you.

You ask questions that take a lot of effort to answer. So don't be surprised when other members don't answer.

 

When did I ask to be spoonfed? I simply asked if we know what each count of Felony murder corresponds to in this case.

 

The type of questions you commonly ask are like that. You ask important questions that may be necessary for you to understand but ones that are unrealistic for you to expect any members here to answer.

Sometimes it feels like you are just lazy and you expect other members to do research for you. You could just as easily find out the answer to those specific questions as anyone else here.

 

So you acknowledge that I simply asked if we know what each count of Felony murder corresponds to in this case. Great.

I've never asked anyone to do any research for me.

Which is unnecessary if someone else knows the answer.

 

All three faced the same nine charges. There are four felony murder charges because the murder occurred during the commission of four different felonies, as follows. It was up to the jury to decide whether each defendant was guilty of all, some or none.

Count 1 - Malice murder
Count 2 - Felony murder (aggravated assault - with firearm)
Count 3 - Felony murder (aggravated assault - with vehicle)
Count 4 - Felony murder (false imprisonment)
Count 5 - Felony murder (criminal attempt at false imprisonment)
Count 6 - Aggravated assault - with firearm
Count 7 - Aggravated assault - with vehicle
Count 8 - False imprisonment
Count 9 - Criminal attempt at false imprisonment

https://www.glynncounty.org/DocumentCenter/View/66861/Indictment

Travis McMichael was found guilty on all counts.
Greg McMichael was found guilty on all except malice murder.
Roddie Bryan was found guilty on all but 3:
malice murder, felony murder (aggravated assault with a firearm) and aggravated assault with a firearm.

 

So the felonies are malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, false imprisonment, and criminal attempt at false imprisonment?

 

The four felony murder charges (counts 2 to 5) exist because the murder occurred during the commission of four different felonies (counts 6 to 9).

Count 1 - Malice murder
Count 2 - Felony murder (felony = aggravated assault - with firearm)
Count 3 - Felony murder (felony = aggravated assault - with vehicle)
Count 4 - Felony murder (felony = false imprisonment)
Count 5 - Felony murder (felony = criminal attempt at false imprisonment)
Count 6 - Aggravated assault - with firearm
Count 7 - Aggravated assault - with vehicle
Count 8 - False imprisonment
Count 9 - Criminal attempt at false imprisonment

If you already understand this, I don't know what the purpose of your response is.

You can clear up any confusion, or confirm things, by looking at the indictment.
https://www.glynncounty.org/DocumentCenter/View/66861/Indictment

 

When I was trained as a security guard, I was told this is what would happen if I ever attempted an unlawful citizens arrest, which is what this was just prior to becoming a homicide.

What can be read between the lines here is that the court has effectively determined that Arbery was lawfully justified in violently defending himself from being attacked by these men.

Taken with the recent Rittenhouse verdict, its good to know that America not only still honors the fundamental concept of the right to self defense, but that contrary to media narratives, we honor it for all ethnicites.