spat
.700 Nitro Express
I thought they were on a public road at the time ?Trespassing.
I thought they were on a public road at the time ?Trespassing.
Just to close the loop on this: I was right. Here is video of him trespassing before, so the “going out for a jog” narrative was a lie, as most of us suspected.
Cops review new video of man who appears to be Ahmaud Arbery
Arbery, 25, was out jogging in Brunswick on February 23, before he was shot dead by father and son Gregory and Travis McMichael, who had trailed him in a white pick-up truck.www.dailymail.co.uk
He kinda changed my outlook . He is correct this guy wasnt running away and got shot he attacked a man and tried to wrestle a gun from his possession. At that point he is justified in shooting him. No matter how we feel the evidence will come out in court .
If the outcome had been reversed (say he was armed and managed to dispatch both of them) you are right, he would have had a very strong case for self defense.They were. He was seen trespassing on a new home site . There is video of him going in and new video of him inside . Thes two goons probably had no idea it was a new home site. They were community watch and somebody may have called to say he was breaking in a house. They took them at their word , and ran the guy down . not knowing what really happened at all.
But assuming he did have a gun , could he use it in self defense ? He has no idea who these freaks are with guns , has no idea he was seen entering a new construction site. these two yahoos pull up with shotguns . I feel he would have every right to defend himself . I don't know how the courts would see it , But I would do the same thing.
You're twisting enough for both of us. My statements in this thread have proven correct. I said there may be going more on. Early on the story's initial "guy going out for jog killed by white people for jogging" narrative didn't pass the sniff test. And the sniff test is almost always right. You called me "insulated" for daring to consider that these guys were not just out hunting for a black guy.Nah. Twist your own words however you see fit to cater to your head space, but be clear about what I've written in this thread.
If the outcome had been reversed (say he was armed and managed to dispatch both of them) you are right, he would have had a very strong case for self defense.
If is a flaw in our self defense law that 2 people shooting at each other can both have a self defense justification, but it is what it is.
It's also a problem that's not easy to fix.
Just some food for thought..
Lot of people claim he was trespassing that day, may want to look up the definition per Georgia state law
View attachment 72405
You didn't post the entire statute.
View attachment 72408
It wasnt their property so how were they to say he was there without authority?
I'm not arguing one way or the other. These discussions always turn into a shit show. Just pointing out the more applicable section of the statute.
I think they made a good guess. Then they decided they would stop him from getting away with a criminal act (btw I'm not saying it's a huge deal. I have done it and will in the future) and took their guns along to do it. It really looks like their reaction was absolutely insane, but I do take issue with the initial, simpleton's narrative that the media has run with that this guy was going out for a jog and shot for jogging while black.It wasnt their property so how were they to say he was there without authority?
I think they made a good guess. Then they decided they would stop him from getting away with a criminal act (btw I'm not saying it's a huge deal. I have done it and will in the future) and took their guns along to do it. It really looks like their reaction was absolutely insane, but I do take issue with the initial, simpleton's narrative that the media has run with that this guy was going out for a jog and shot for jogging while black.
Let's all be honest here. The comment fits perfectly. It's not directed at any specific race, it's directed at specific parts of any community based on their behavior. Perfect examples also include ANTIFA and the pussy hat peeps. Which are predominant white. They act as if they escaped a zoo acting like animals. I have very close friends who are black and they think the same as most on this forum when it comes to the behavior of some communities. Why act like a rational adult when it's so much easier to destroy shit like a spoiled child. Do you seriously support that kind of behavior?I originally responded to the "zoo" comment
Jogging/walking/driving etc. while Black is a legitimate hazard.
"They tried to stop him. For what? Jogging? Were they going to arrest him for jogging? kidnap him? Have a word with him? Why did they target him?"
Do you realize how many times the cops have been called either on me, or other Black folks I know, simply for entering into public spaces that white folks have decided are their own personal fiefdoms? That these two individuals would take "the law" into their own hands is simply an extension of the attitude that the "Karens" of this country have.
Well, that assumes the situation starts with an actual attack.Actually,Only the person being attacked can claim self defense. Aggressors cant. But there's the rub ,It can be argued either way in this case , depends on how the jury is going to see it.
Thats the act of someone trying to start a race war.Black Georgia man, 20, is arrested for setting up fake Facebook page in support of Ahmaud Arbery's two killers and threatening protesters who paid their respects at the spot where the 25-year-old jogger was 'lynched'
Rashawn Smith, 20, is alleged to have created a fake Facebook page which he then used to send 'hoax' threats to protesters demanding justice in the fatal shooting of Ahmaud Arbery
Jogging/walking/driving etc. while Black is a legitimate hazard.
Do you realize how many times the cops have been called either on me, or other Black folks I know, simply for entering into public spaces that white folks have decided are their own personal fiefdoms?
Id say zero.
c) A person commits the offense of burglary in the second degree when, without authority and with the intent to commit a felony or theft therein, he or she enters or remains within an occupied, unoccupied, or vacant building, structure, vehicle, railroad car, watercraft, or aircraft. A person who commits the offense of burglary in the second degree shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years. Upon the second and all subsequent convictions for burglary in the second degree, the defendant shall be guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than eight years.
No matter how we look at this, after watching the video of inside the home, he is in FACT guilty of this crime. Hands down.
DWB is definitely a thing. My lawyer friend says his wife gets pulled over for it every few months in their neighborhood, until they see the address/name and let her go.
This is the part that I don't get. Is the part I have in bold the key to the whole crime? It says they commit the offense when they enter or remain occupied in those areas when they don't have authority and they intend to commit a felony or theft. Is the intent the key here? So if you don't intend to commit a felony or theft, are you then not committing anything? I hate legalese. If that's 2D burglary, then shit, I've been guilty of that before, just by snooping around and not doing anything. Unless there's more to that video than him just walking up/in and looking around curious, but I don't see anything.
As discussed already, these guys definitely did this all wrong. Here's a question - if their neighbors had said "somebody" has been breaking and entering in the neighborhood and now somebody has been spotted in a house right now, do those boys grab their guns to go confront the person the same way? Who died and left them in charge of the neighborhood and gave them the authority to rule it w/ force? I don't know how gun laws work in Georgia, but what if they just called the cops and said, "We got him" and they kept him corralled until the police showed up, would they be in any sort of trouble for leaving the house with guns to detain this guy? It's not the old west anymore, this isn't Josey Wales and we don't have bounty hunters like that anymore, so what of their actions had they not shot the guy?
I think the feelings from the community in this stem from the fact that it took so long to get these guys due to everyone knowing the guy, the DA basically leaving it up to whoever to decide whether or not to arrest them, and the coronavirus interfering. It took way too long to arrest them for what they did.