1 hour ago, Mike030270 said:

Saying maga is bringing him up

Sure

If you don’t think many people think MAGA really means MAWA, you are in denial. 

44 minutes ago, SNOORDA said:

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

They didn’t know his priors when the stalked and killed him. 

32 minutes ago, SNOORDA said:

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

Georgia Law: https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2014/title-24/chapter-4/section-24-4-404.  So read through this, and then explain how any past transgressions of Arbery or McMichaels would be admissible in a Georgia court of law.  

(a) Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character shall not be admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except for:

(1) Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused or by the prosecution to rebut the same; or if evidence of a trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime is offered by an accused and admitted under paragraph (2) of this subsection, evidence of the same trait of character of the accused offered by the prosecution;

(2) Subject to the limitations imposed by Code Section 24-4-412, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime offered by an accused or by the prosecution to rebut the same; or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the alleged victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the alleged victim was the first aggressor; or

(3) Evidence of the character of a witness, as provided in Code Sections 24-6-607, 24-6-608, and 24-6-609.

(b) Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts shall not be admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, including, but not limited to, proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident. The prosecution in a criminal proceeding shall provide reasonable notice to the defense in advance of trial, unless pretrial notice is excused by the court upon good cause shown, of the general nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial. Notice shall not be required when the evidence of prior crimes, wrongs, or acts is offered to prove the circumstances immediately surrounding the charged crime, motive, or prior difficulties between the accused and the alleged victim.

21 minutes ago, SNOORDA said:

I would bite my tongue.  I hate jail

I never been there but I imagine I’d hate it too. I really don’t know what I’d do, it depends on my mood at the time. I would try to bite my tongue and say little as possible. I’m pretty sure I’d be a little fired up though if I was just chilling by myself in my car and ended up being harassed like he was. It’s a good that Barney Fife’s taser malfunctioned, or he didn’t accidentally pull his weapon. 
 

4 minutes ago, Tnt4philly said:

I never been there but I imagine I’d hate it too. I really don’t know what I’d do, it depends on my mood at the time. I would try to bite my tongue and say little as possible. I’m pretty sure I’d be a little fired up though if I was just chilling by myself in my car and ended up being harassed like he was. It’s a good that Barney Fife’s taser malfunctioned, or he didn’t accidentally pull his weapon. 
 

Its always best to just stfu and go home. Always.  No explanations. No sad stories.  And certainly no bad attitude

26 minutes ago, Tnt4philly said:

They didn’t know his priors when the stalked and killed him. 

Which will be discussed in court. 

https://www.fox13memphis.com/news/trending/4-minutes-new-video-shows-length-time-ahmaud-arbery-was-chased-before-being-killed-lawyer-says/TKTJYDV2KVA3DDGJ3EWJPQXG3M/?fbclid=IwAR2ectSIx3EzW4aN39lVYny1b3LIjsWGizracJlHP4j3CXW0x3gOL9c0ecQ
 

4 minutes: New video shows length of time Ahmaud Arbery was chased before being killed, lawyer says

7 minutes ago, SNOORDA said:

 

Which will be discussed in court. 

As I already explained above, no they will not. 

58 minutes ago, SNOORDA said:

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

He wasn't on trial in court. He was jogging and did not commit any crimes. His priors should have no bearing on the situation. The morons that killed him should be the ones having their past brought up because they did actually kill someone. 

2 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

Saying maga is bringing him up

Sure

You just wanted to whine about Trump. It's very easy to read this thread and realize that was never the tone of this thread. You saw MAGA and got triggered.

37 minutes ago, 20dawk4life said:

He wasn't on trial in court. He was jogging and did not commit any crimes. His priors should have no bearing on the situation. The morons that killed him should be the ones having their past brought up because they did actually kill someone. 

Well that won’t happen either.  

2 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Well that won’t happen either.  

Yup

Those McMichael boys must really not like their colons.

1 hour ago, SNOORDA said:

Its always best to just stfu and go home. Always.  No explanations. No sad stories.  And certainly no bad attitude

Which will be discussed in court. 

I agree with the first part. You can’t fight for your rights in court if you’re dead. I’d still probably run my mouth a little 
 

This guy never made it to "court.”  

6 hours 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.

I did get a kick out of you trying to walk back your prior comments, trying to write a more objectively based paragraph (though bonus points for still managing to place partial blame on Arbery for being murdered). 

So just in case you need a reminder of why the "back and forth" had gone on so long, here are some of the things you said earlier in this thread:

"Did Aubery get shot for going into the house or trying to disarm a dude?"   Oh, you mean he got shot for legally trying to defend himself in the face of imminent risk of loss of life?  Sure saying he got shot for "trying to disarm a dude" is certainly an interesting way to phrase that.

"Knowing what we know now (black males caught on tape multiple times in homes where burglaries occurred) it's a shame cooler heads didn't prevail. I understand where the father/son combo were coming from... attempting to hold someone they thought just burglarized a home until police arrived. Obviously, if Arbery was just out for an innocent jog, I've got sympathy for him as well. I think there's still a lot we don't know as well, that may be uncovered during the trial."

LOL pretty quick how you went from "There were black males caught on tape multiple times in homes where burglaries occurred" to "No, I don't actually know of any burglaries that were committed in that neighborhood".  This paragraph was just beyond silly.

 "huh, I had read that cameras were installed for that very reason. I think there's still a lot we don't know. What did the father/son combo say to Arbery? Did they just pull up on him guns pointed at him? Did they have any interaction at all beforehand? Did they state their intention to perform a citizen's arrest or ask him to stop because the cops were on the way? Still a lot of information missing."

This one was a fun one.  This was when you were still trying to play the angle of, 'if they told Arbery that they were planning to make a citizen's arrest of him, then this makes a big difference'.  Might want to keep this gem quiet though, wouldn't want burglars to learn this little secret.  Anytime a criminal plans to rob someone, just approach them with your gun drawn and tell them you plan to perform a citizen's arrest.  If they try to fight back, you can just kill them, and then you're ok because you told them you were planning on performing a citizens arrest.  If they try to disarm you, then you are in your right to shoot them.

And then there was you posting a video of Arbery being questioned by police for minding his own business in his own car.  That was pretty awesome. 

And then there was you posting a video of Arbery being arrested for stealing a TV.  Again, how is that relevant to the case other than you trying to shame a dead man?

"And, if Arbery has an extensive criminal history and a history of theft, it might help explain why the DA decided against pressing charges considering the father/son combo have a clean record. It still doesn't mean that this incident wasn't tragic or that the father and son should be out making citizen's arrests, but it does help explain the lack of charges brought forth. It's also entirely possible that Arbery was casing the place or had robbed it in the past."

lolol if the DA decided against pressing charges because the father/son combo have a clean record and Arbery was serving a 5 year probation sentence for stealing a TV, then that DA needs to be kicked out of office.  I mean, what kind of messed up logic would that be? 

"Sir, we have an unarmed man jogging through a neighborhood.  He's stopped in the street by a man armed with a shotgun.  A tussle ensues and the man with the shotgun shoots and kills the unarmed jogger.  They apparently thought that the man going for a jog had been robbing houses."

"oh.  Did they see him robbing a house?"

"no sir."

"Are we sure the jogger was unarmed?  Maybe he was the aggressor, and jumped the man, attacking him. And the man, who had been concealing his weapon, had reason to believe his life was in danger and thus discharged his weapon. "

"No, sir we actually have the whole thing on video. The men chased down the jogger, cutting off his path, shotgun drawn. The jogger tries to run around their vehicle, and that's when the tussle ensued"

"Oh, I see.  Well did you do a background check on their records?"

"Yes.  The 2 men who did the shooting have a clean record.  The jogger is serving a 5 year probation for stealing a TV"

"Oh, well why didn't you say so from the beginning!  Let them go then.  Nothing further to do here!"

I also like that last line you threw in there.  I mean, technically I guess it's entirely possible that you're a racist.  I mean, I'm not saying you are, I'm just saying it's possible.  No harm in saying that, right? 

 

7 hours ago, Kz! said:

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.

So about those "alleged burglaries in the neighborhood".....................

There had only been 1 burglary in the neighborhood from Jan 1 to Feb 23. The theft of a handgun from Travis McMichael's unlocked truck. So the notion that there were a string of home burglaries occurring in that neighborhood is a flat out lie.   

And Larry English, the owner of the home under construction, did not share the CCTV footage with the McMichaels. So they would have had no way of viewing said footage.  So, the notion that the McMichaels had viewed the CCTV footage is also a lie. 

Any other clever theories you'd like to entertain?

Holy crap dude I tap you win. Ggs 

6 hours 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.

 

1 hour ago, Phillyterp85 said:

So about those "alleged burglaries in the neighborhood".....................

There had only been 1 burglary in the neighborhood from Jan 1 to Feb 23. The theft of a handgun from Travis McMichael's unlocked truck. So the notion that there were a string of home burglaries occurring in that neighborhood is a flat out lie.   

And Larry English, the owner of the home under construction, did not share the CCTV footage with the McMichaels. So they would have had no way of viewing said footage.  So, the notion that the McMichaels had viewed the CCTV footage is also a lie. 

Any other clever theories you'd like to entertain?

Yeah so one of the idiots involved left a handgun in an unlocked vehicle. And then this happens and he doesn't get charged.

 

@PoconoDon slightly off topic but relevant to local law enforcement. I'm not sure how you feel, but tbh I think that most municipal departments shouldn't exist. Most states should just have a state police force that enforces state law statewide without any small town jurisdictions getting in the way. The only thing extra that municipal police do is do some local ordinance enforcement. Also while we are at it do away with University police. To me it just makes the most sense. I have met a lot more locals that shouldn't have been a LEO than I have met Troopers that shouldn't be a LEO. Let it be devoid of small town politics and people who exhibit mass levels of Dunning-Krueger.

6 hours ago, Kz! said:

Holy crap dude I tap you win. Ggs 

Good call. You got murdered there. I kind of feel bad for you. Considering your past actions you share some of the blame though.

5 hours ago, Bill said:

 

Yeah so one of the idiots involved left a handgun in an unlocked vehicle. And then this happens and he doesn't get charged.

Yup.  Sounds like a real solid responsible gun owner.  Everyone knows you’re supposed to store your firearm in your unlocked vehicle parked outside your house.

6 hours ago, Kz! said:

Holy crap dude I tap you win. Ggs 

That’s a good idea.  I’d tap to if I were in your position.  Though I gotta say, you show a lot of perseverance. You’re like the guy caught in an arm bar with his elbow completely dislocated, yet refusing to tap, wanting to go on.  

7 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said:

So about those "alleged burglaries in the neighborhood".....................

There had only been 1 burglary in the neighborhood from Jan 1 to Feb 23. The theft of a handgun from Travis McMichael's unlocked truck. So the notion that there were a string of home burglaries occurring in that neighborhood is a flat out lie.   

And Larry English, the owner of the home under construction, did not share the CCTV footage with the McMichaels. So they would have had no way of viewing said footage.  So, the notion that the McMichaels had viewed the CCTV footage is also a lie. 

Any other clever theories you'd like to entertain?

To me this statement is telling. I once had a friend (he has passed) that would never lock anything up and when I would question him about he would say "nobody would ever steal from me" like he was this bad arse that everyone feared. Quite possibly these jamokes felt the same way and they were looking for retaliation on the guy that dared steal from them (not that it was the same guy but they may have thought so).

Or maybe it's a colossal reach on my part  

8 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said:

I did get a kick out of you trying to walk back your prior comments, trying to write a more objectively based paragraph (though bonus points for still managing to place partial blame on Arbery for being murdered). 

So just in case you need a reminder of why the "back and forth" had gone on so long, here are some of the things you said earlier in this thread:

"Did Aubery get shot for going into the house or trying to disarm a dude?"   Oh, you mean he got shot for legally trying to defend himself in the face of imminent risk of loss of life?  Sure saying he got shot for "trying to disarm a dude" is certainly an interesting way to phrase that.

"Knowing what we know now (black males caught on tape multiple times in homes where burglaries occurred) it's a shame cooler heads didn't prevail. I understand where the father/son combo were coming from... attempting to hold someone they thought just burglarized a home until police arrived. Obviously, if Arbery was just out for an innocent jog, I've got sympathy for him as well. I think there's still a lot we don't know as well, that may be uncovered during the trial."

LOL pretty quick how you went from "There were black males caught on tape multiple times in homes where burglaries occurred" to "No, I don't actually know of any burglaries that were committed in that neighborhood".  This paragraph was just beyond silly.

 "huh, I had read that cameras were installed for that very reason. I think there's still a lot we don't know. What did the father/son combo say to Arbery? Did they just pull up on him guns pointed at him? Did they have any interaction at all beforehand? Did they state their intention to perform a citizen's arrest or ask him to stop because the cops were on the way? Still a lot of information missing."

This one was a fun one.  This was when you were still trying to play the angle of, 'if they told Arbery that they were planning to make a citizen's arrest of him, then this makes a big difference'.  Might want to keep this gem quiet though, wouldn't want burglars to learn this little secret.  Anytime a criminal plans to rob someone, just approach them with your gun drawn and tell them you plan to perform a citizen's arrest.  If they try to fight back, you can just kill them, and then you're ok because you told them you were planning on performing a citizens arrest.  If they try to disarm you, then you are in your right to shoot them.

And then there was you posting a video of Arbery being questioned by police for minding his own business in his own car.  That was pretty awesome. 

And then there was you posting a video of Arbery being arrested for stealing a TV.  Again, how is that relevant to the case other than you trying to shame a dead man?

"And, if Arbery has an extensive criminal history and a history of theft, it might help explain why the DA decided against pressing charges considering the father/son combo have a clean record. It still doesn't mean that this incident wasn't tragic or that the father and son should be out making citizen's arrests, but it does help explain the lack of charges brought forth. It's also entirely possible that Arbery was casing the place or had robbed it in the past."

lolol if the DA decided against pressing charges because the father/son combo have a clean record and Arbery was serving a 5 year probation sentence for stealing a TV, then that DA needs to be kicked out of office.  I mean, what kind of messed up logic would that be? 

"Sir, we have an unarmed man jogging through a neighborhood.  He's stopped in the street by a man armed with a shotgun.  A tussle ensues and the man with the shotgun shoots and kills the unarmed jogger.  They apparently thought that the man going for a jog had been robbing houses."

"oh.  Did they see him robbing a house?"

"no sir."

"Are we sure the jogger was unarmed?  Maybe he was the aggressor, and jumped the man, attacking him. And the man, who had been concealing his weapon, had reason to believe his life was in danger and thus discharged his weapon. "

"No, sir we actually have the whole thing on video. The men chased down the jogger, cutting off his path, shotgun drawn. The jogger tries to run around their vehicle, and that's when the tussle ensued"

"Oh, I see.  Well did you do a background check on their records?"

"Yes.  The 2 men who did the shooting have a clean record.  The jogger is serving a 5 year probation for stealing a TV"

"Oh, well why didn't you say so from the beginning!  Let them go then.  Nothing further to do here!"

I also like that last line you threw in there.  I mean, technically I guess it's entirely possible that you're a racist.  I mean, I'm not saying you are, I'm just saying it's possible.  No harm in saying that, right? 

 

13 hours ago, VanHammersly said:

https://www.fox13memphis.com/news/trending/4-minutes-new-video-shows-length-time-ahmaud-arbery-was-chased-before-being-killed-lawyer-says/TKTJYDV2KVA3DDGJ3EWJPQXG3M/?fbclid=IwAR2ectSIx3EzW4aN39lVYny1b3LIjsWGizracJlHP4j3CXW0x3gOL9c0ecQ
 

4 minutes: New video shows length of time Ahmaud Arbery was chased before being killed, lawyer says

Quote

Arbery appears to run around the passenger side of the truck to avoid Travis McMichael. As he rounds the front of the truck, a shot is fired and a struggle for the shotgun ensues.

As he fights for his life, two more shots are fired.

It is kind of weird that blatant lies like this are published.

1 hour ago, Kz! said:

It is kind of weird that blatant lies like this are published.

Oh please tell us what part of this is a lie

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Oh please tell us what part of this is a lie

Didn't the video pretty clearly show them engaged in a physical altercation prior to shots being fired?

1 hour ago, Kz! said:

It is kind of weird that blatant lies like this are published.

This is pretty ironic coming from the guy who has repeatedly told the lie that there were a string of burglaries in the neighborhood by a suspect matching Arbery’s description and that the McMichaels had access to the CCTV footage.