I’m not sure what they are claiming they were making a citizen’s arrest for? Did they think he was keistering all of the copper pipe or an A/C unit he was stealing? I mean they couldn’t possibly be trying to justify stopping someone at gun point based on some grainy surveillance footage could they?

13 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

1) can you cite all these crimes that happened in the neighborhood, and the description of suspects that matched what Arbery looked like? 

2) CCTV footage of Arbery and a bunch of other people that look absolutely nothing like Abrery going through the house.  

3) You've repeatedly made the "in their mind they were performing a citizen's arrest" argument, as if that provides some sort of justification. 

4) You've brought up past trangressions of Arbery's, as if that has any relevance whatsoever to this case (while conveniently ignoring the fact that McMichael had lost his power to arrest for several years and failed to report it to his supervisor and was temporary stripped of his firearm).  Seems like you are only interested in looking into past trangressions of the victim for some weird reason.....

5) You've acted as if it was the McMichaels, and not Arbery, who had the right to use deadly force to defend themselves in this situation, which is just absolute lunacy.   If you are going for a jog, minding your own business, and someone stops you in your path armed with a shotgun, it is you who has the right to use deadly force to defend themselves.  The armed man stopping you in your path is the aggressor. 

 

1) No. I've already posted the CCTV footage multiple times.

2) Not just the footage from the day in question. There's footage of a young man that looks like Arbery at night. Again this does not mean Arbery did it or should have been killed for it. It does potentially help explain the father/son combos actions misguided though they were.

3) Again, no. Since Arbery did not steal anything, they should not have tried to perform a citizens arrest. 

4) I'm sorry I didn't find out the tidbit about McMichael not properly reporting his lack of training or whatever you mentioned there. I will try to find that information next time. I'm not positive that information is as relevant as Arbery's past transgressions, but that's OK, I'll concede I should have found it.

5) I think the use of deadly force was the only conceivable outcome after the shotgun was grabbed and the superman punches were thrown. At that point, someone wasn't making it out alive in all likelihood. 

I hope this clears up the confusion and hope we can just get back to being friends. Thanks for listening.

Just now, Jsvand12 said:

I’m not sure what they are claiming they were making a citizen’s arrest for? Did they think he was keistering all of the copper pipe or an A/C unit he was stealing? I mean they couldn’t possibly be trying to justify stopping someone at gun point based on some grainy surveillance footage could they?

I certainly think they did believe that, yes. JMO, I mean no offense. 

20 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

you knew exactly how you played the victim card. you do it daily, but of course you play dumb. comes natural I know, I know. its shows with all your emoji use. 

also, you seem to be laboring under the delusion that I care if I become irrelevant in your eyes. keep doing that please.

Beta TATEr or Mr. Irrelevant? Which do you prefer?

Just now, Kz! said:

Beta TATEr or Mr. Irrelevant? Which do you prefer?

puppet master would be more appropriate considering you keep responding to someone you call irrelevant.

now, respond again capt cuck.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

Beta_TATEr, please and thank you.

 

 

Consider it done.   

26 minutes ago, Kz! said:

1) No. I've already posted the CCTV footage multiple times.

2) Not just the footage from the day in question. There's footage of a young man that looks like Arbery at night. Again this does not mean Arbery did it or should have been killed for it. It does potentially help explain the father/son combos actions misguided though they were.

3) Again, no. Since Arbery did not steal anything, they should not have tried to perform a citizens arrest. 

4) I'm sorry I didn't find out the tidbit about McMichael not properly reporting his lack of training or whatever you mentioned there. I will try to find that information next time. I'm not positive that information is as relevant as Arbery's past transgressions, but that's OK, I'll concede I should have found it.

5) I think the use of deadly force was the only conceivable outcome after the shotgun was grabbed and the superman punches were thrown. At that point, someone wasn't making it out alive in all likelihood. 

I hope this clears up the confusion and hope we can just get back to being friends. Thanks for listening.

1) Oh, so when you cite "all the crimes in the neighborhood" what you really mean was, "I'm just speculating that there were a bunch of crimes happening in the neighborhood, and I have no facts to back this up".  Got it.

2a) That's completely irrelevant.  Even if Arbery DID go into that house the night before, it is completely irrelevant to the case.  2b) Secondly, even for this crappy justification to hold, that would mean that the owner of the house would have had to relay this info to the McMichaels to even let them know. Nowhere have I read that the owner was in contact with the McMichaels to let them know the descriptions of people that were going through the house that night.  2c) There were numerous people going through that house over weeks of time.  Were the McMichaels stopping random people in the street with their shotguns, to see if they were the ones?  Nope. 

3) Oh good, so you finally see that the citizens arrest argument is absolutely irrelevant.  Good.  Progress.

4) LOLOLOL.   Took me 2 minutes to find.  But yea, I'm sure it was just an innocent oversight on your part.  Bonus points for saying that your not positive that this info isn't as relevant as the victim's prior transgressions lolol.

5) Right, and if the aggressor is the one that uses the deadly force, that's not self defense.  You can't pull a gun on someone, putting someone else's life in peril, and then why they try to disarm you, you kill them and then claim that you were just defending yourself.  That's not how self defense works. 

6 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

1) Oh, so when you cite "all the crimes in the neighborhood" what you really mean was, "I'm just speculating that there were a bunch of crimes happening in the neighborhood, and I have no facts to back this up".  Got it.

2a) That's completely irrelevant.  Even if Arbery DID go into that house the night before, it is completely irrelevant to the case.  2b) Secondly, even for this crappy justification to hold, that would mean that the owner of the house would have had to relay this info to the McMichaels to even let them know. Nowhere have I read that the owner was in contact with the McMichaels to let them know the descriptions of people that were going through the house that night.  2c) There were numerous people going through that house over weeks of time.  Were the McMichaels stopping random people in the street with their shotguns, to see if they were the ones?  Nope. 

3) Oh good, so you finally see that the citizens arrest argument is absolutely irrelevant.  Good.  Progress.

4) LOLOLOL.   Took me 2 minutes to find.  But yea, I'm sure it was just an innocent oversight on your part.  Bonus points for saying that your not positive that this info isn't as relevant as the victim's prior transgressions lolol.

5) Right, and if the aggressor is the one that uses the deadly force, that's not self defense.  You can't pull a gun on someone, putting someone else's life in peril, and then why they try to disarm you, you kill them and then claim that you were just defending yourself.  That's not how self defense works. 

Deep breaths. I'll sum up my position succinctly and you are free to disagree and call me names or whatever, but this back and forth has gone on long enough and is becoming too time consuming. 

It is my belief that the McMichaels and the other dude erroneously attempted to make a citizens arrest. I don't believe they set out to murder Arbery given their lack of histories of violence/police records etc. I do acknowledge that one of them lost the power to arrest years earlier. I believe, given the CCTV footage and the alleged burglaries in the neighborhood, they had reason to believe Arbery had stolen something and was fleeing. At this point, I'd like to reiterate that Arbery hadn't stolen anything and they did not have a legal right to make a citizens arrest in this instance. Once again, they should not have attempted a citizen's arrest. Having said that, I do not believe Arbery should have lunged for the gun, and I have little doubt he'd be alive today if he hadn't lunged for the gun. I think Arbery shares at least some of the blame for the way the events of that day unfolded, and I think he's certainly paid the steepest price.

You disagree, and that's OK, too. I'd like to put this whole crazy ordeal behind us, and continue to build our friendship going forward. Who knows, maybe we'll become best friends?

I'd like to finish by saying, I do not believe the McMichaels should have attempted to perform a citizens arrest on Arbery. Good day.

Okay so here's my take. Even if the 2 guys thought that they were making a citizens arrest they were wrong. And when you make the choice to make a citizens arrest and it goes wrong guess who needs to hold the responsibility for that? I carry and I would definitely try and help defend someones life if needed but I sure as hell aint chasing somebody down the street that "looks like" a person of interest in robberies or whatever. Only time that gun gets pulled is if my life or someone else's life is in immediate danger, end of story.

24 minutes ago, Kz! said:

I think Arbery shares at least some of the blame for the way the events of that day unfolded

False.

13 minutes ago, greend said:

Okay so here's my take. Even if the 2 guys thought that they were making a citizens arrest they were wrong. And when you make the choice to make a citizens arrest and it goes wrong guess who needs to hold the responsibility for that? I carry and I would definitely try and help defend someones life if needed but I sure as hell aint chasing somebody down the street that "looks like" a person of interest in robberies or whatever. Only time that gun gets pulled is if my life or someone else's life is in immediate danger, end of story.

well said.

38 minutes ago, Kz! said:

Deep breaths. I'll sum up my position succinctly and you are free to disagree and call me names or whatever, but this back and forth has gone on long enough and is becoming too time consuming. 

It is my belief that the McMichaels and the other dude erroneously attempted to make a citizens arrest. I don't believe they set out to murder Arbery given their lack of histories of violence/police records etc. I do acknowledge that one of them lost the power to arrest years earlier. I believe, given the CCTV footage and the alleged burglaries in the neighborhood, they had reason to believe Arbery had stolen something and was fleeing. At this point, I'd like to reiterate that Arbery hadn't stolen anything and they did not have a legal right to make a citizens arrest in this instance. Once again, they should not have attempted a citizen's arrest. Having said that, I do not believe Arbery should have lunged for the gun, and I have little doubt he'd be alive today if he hadn't lunged for the gun. I think Arbery shares at least some of the blame for the way the events of that day unfolded, and I think he's certainly paid the steepest price.

You disagree, and that's OK, too. I'd like to put this whole crazy ordeal behind us, and continue to build our friendship going forward. Who knows, maybe we'll become best friends?

I'd like to finish by saying, I do not believe the McMichaels should have attempted to perform a citizens arrest on Arbery. Good day.

That is utter bulls**. Somebody else in this thread was like "when someone pulls a gun on you, you just abide". How he reacted to his life being in danger means nothing. He decided to fight. He could have easily put his hands up and still been blown away. He shares ZERO responsibility for how those events unfolded.

3 hours ago, SNOORDA said:

Is that a question?   Because i know exactly how things go when you get an attitude with the cops

So you are going to just let a cop violate your rights without a little attitude? I wouldn’t physically resist arrest but they would get an ear full if I was hassled the way he was. 

Did some new info come out that they screamed this is maga country or was wearing maga clothes? Otherwise how is Trump even involved in this discussion? Are they automatically maga people because they're racist?

It's like a go-to with some of you

Under Georgia law I suspect the McMichaels are likely going to face Felony Murder Charges with the underlying felony of false imprisonment (unauthorized arrest and detention at gunpoint).

25 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Did some new info come out that they screamed this is maga country or was wearing maga clothes? Otherwise how is Trump even involved in this discussion? Are they automatically maga people because they're racist?

It's like a go-to with some of you

 The only person who has mentioned Trump in this thread is you.  Search the thread, the name was not brought up once until you posted.  The term "MAGA" was used twice before you, once as a "this is maga country" joke on the first page and the second was someone making fun of KZ.

C'mon now.

4 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

 The only person who has mentioned Trump in this thread is you.  Search the thread, the name has not been not been brought up once until you posted.  The term "MAGA" was used twice before you, once as a "this is maga country" joke on the first page and the second was someone making fun of KZ not the perps.

C'mon now.

Saying maga is bringing him up

Sure

25 minutes ago, PoconoDon said:

Under Georgia law I suspect the McMichaels are likely going to face Felony Murder Charges with the underlying felony of false imprisonment (unauthorized arrest and detention at gunpoint).

Wait wait wait, have you taken into account that a few years ago, Arbery was in his vehicle minding his own business and was questioned by police as to what he was up to?

Also, have you considered that in the mind of the McMichaels, they were just doing their duty as citizens to carry out a citizens’ arrest?

Ive been told that this is very relevant information. 

10 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Saying maga is bringing him up

Sure

So one guy uses the term MAGA in the context of mocking KZ several pages back and zero people mention Trump's name in this entire section until you bring it up, yet somehow that translates to other people  trying to make this about him? 

7 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Wait wait wait, have you taken into account that a few years ago, Arbery was in his vehicle minding his own business and was questioned by police as to what he was up to?

Also, have you considered that in the mind of the McMichaels, they were just doing their duty as citizens to carry out a citizens’ arrest?

Ive been told that this is very relevant information. 

Based on the little I know, and I'd bet that's about 3-5% of the facts, I stand by my post.

Many things are relevant, especially the state of mind of the McMichaels (mens rea), but the use of deadly force still has to be reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. That's where their superficial defenses break down and stay broken. That's how I see it at this point.

22 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Saying maga is bringing him up

Sure

Triggered much, snowflake?

12 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

So one guy uses the term MAGA in the context of mocking KZ several pages back and zero people mention Trump's name in this entire section until you bring it up, yet somehow that translates to other people  trying to make this about him? 

JC forget it

Just now, xBMTx said:

Triggered much, snowflake?

Whose clone are you?

37 minutes ago, PoconoDon said:

Based on the little I know, and I'd bet that's about 3-5% of the facts, I stand by my post.

Many things are relevant, especially the state of mind of the McMichaels (mens rea), but the use of deadly force still has to be reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. That's where their superficial defenses break down and stay broken. That's how I see it at this point.

Ha yes, I was being facetious.  Making fun of KZAnne’s posts on the subject.

23 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said:

which is abosf-ckinglutely completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.  

Yeah.  I mean the law never conceders priors.  They also never use past behaviors to gauge a situation.   Ever. 

2 hours ago, Tnt4philly said:

So you are going to just let a cop violate your rights without a little attitude? I wouldn’t physically resist arrest but they would get an ear full if I was hassled the way he was. 

I would bite my tongue.  I hate jail

22 minutes ago, SNOORDA said:

Yeah.  I mean the law never conceders priors.  They also never use past behaviors to gauge a situation.   Ever. 

Actually, in general, you can’t use past character evidence to show that a person  acted in conformity with a character trait.

So yes, past behaviors are for the most part, not permissible.  As are previous crimes if the purpose of introducing those crimes is to try to prove a person’s character in order to show that the person acted in accordance with the character.

So in this situation, bringing up Arbery’s prior arrest for theft would absolutely not be permissible in a court of law.