Discussion in 'Current Events' started by superbadbrutha, Apr 29, 2020.
You can not demonstrate this.
It is relevant because it shows his history as a thief.
Please show me in the constitution where it says you have a right to trespass in someone else’s home.
Irrelevant. Past crimes do not give you authority to detain someone. You are required to witness a crime first hand, have immediate knowledge of one. They did not.
The only thing you have been consistent about is claiming this guy was stealing when NOTHING has been stolen.
Here comes the excuses.
When did Arbery threaten anyone?
Doesn't mean he called them, as a matter of fact, he said he has never called them. Also how stupid it is for the police to tell someone to call someone who isn't LE if a crime is committed. Is that even lawful.
What crime, there is only ONE incident on record.
I don't need to find out any names and call anyone, they watched this white folks go in and out of that house and could have cared less.
Why do I need to do that, I don't live in that neighborhood and it isn't may house. The McMichaels should have done that since they were so worried about Arbery.
We know it was unlawful. McMichaels admits this.
Of course there is no evidence because there is no audio of the confrontation, if there was no video these 2 racist POS would have never been arrested. It would have been swept under the rug. You claimed they didn't threaten him, you don't know what was said so you don't know if they threatened him or not.
Past crimes may not give them authority, but it will be relevant in the trial because it shows a pattern.
A pattern of being a thief is relevant and if the judge happens to rule against it, any conviction would go to an appeal on this ruling.
If Arbery had been white McMichaels would have cared less about him going into that house, since they didn't say anything to the whites that were entering the house. If Arbery had been white and for some reason they would have shot him these clowns would have been thrown in jail the same day. Also if Arbery had been white it wouldn't even be a thread on it, because folks like you don't show up until it is someone white murdered by someone black and rippin off the same BS you are thrown out right now.
What pattern does it show? How many times had he entered this house before? The homeowner stated that he had NEVER stolen anything out of his house.
It will not be allowed into evidence at trial, as it’s entirely irrelevant to what happened in this instance.
And would lose on appeal, as prior bad acts is not admissible.
Here you go with that BS again, please show us the video of where he entered the house through the back. He entered the same way the whites folks entered, was their intent to steal and I have yet to hear you call them burglars.
If Arbury was white this wouldn’t even make the national news.
The 2 suspects are being held without bail & the crying continues from the left.
Innocent people are being killed daily on the south side of Chicago & nobody cares.
You're right, because the McMichaels would have been thrown in jail the day of the murder.
No the crying is coming from the anti-black folks about how they are innocent and should have been released with a medal.
Oh but you care. Smfh.
Well I will be looking forward to your rant when they are acquitted.
This is nothing more than manslaughter, and after seeing the video of the punk, he no longer has my sympathy.
He was a criminal like Michael Brown & he got what he deserved for attacking the man with the gun, just like Michael Brown.
There is zero chance they are acquitted. Best case scenario is they plead to manslaughter.
It’s felony murder not manslaughter.
demonstrably false. McMichaels had no authority at all to attempt to detain Arbery. They chased him down in a vehicle, blocked his escape with the truck and an armed man in the street. They were brandishing firearms. Arbery has the absolute right to defend himself.
Arbery is not the defendant so his past has no relevance
He was black, he never had your sympathy. Funny how all the thugs are unarmed and the so-called law abiding folks are armed
And I did: Agg assault and murder. I even quoted you the ****ing statutes dude. See the arrow? Click the arrow.
We talked for a full day ffs and now you want to pretend like I didn't respond. Absurd.
Ignoring the fact that since they can't shelter under the CA statute the chase and attempt to seize Arbery under the 4th amendment (which Greg admits he was trying to do) they are the initial aggressors. The video shows the 2nd half of their encounter, Greg tells the police all about the 1st half and how he chased the guy down armed and tried to box him in. All of which I've pointed out to you ad nausem.
As already pointed out: When doing so is the continuation of agg assault, yes it is.
I have already, and more than once. If you want to find the link, go back through the posts. Agg assault which is assault while in possession of a weapon. What is assault? Causing a person the reasonable apprehension of a violent injury without excuse.
Again: The video is not the entirety of the encounter, see the police report where greg admits to these things. Honestly man. This is just sad.
See the link I put out yesterday from the police chief and the guy who teaches baby prosecutors at UGA Law? Why don't you go argue with them because they say its about PRESENT CRIMES, not ones that occurred 2 months ago.
Which doesn't even qualify for criminal trespass because nothing in excess of $500 was taken or broken and he didn't remain when told to leave. Which wouldn't even matter if it was because: GREG didn't know about Arbery being at the site that day until AFTER the chase. Greg encounters him running down the street, says he recognizes him from the night tapes and goes in pursuit. He does not claim that he has reasonable and probable grounds to suspect Arbery had just committed a felony and was fleeing it. Whic his what's required for CA in Georgia see the plain language of the statute and the link from yesterday.
I didn’t lose any sleep over it either way, but I did have sympathy for his family.
The video of the punk and the fact we know know he is a convicted thief, lets me know I made the right decision.
I am interested to see how the trial turns out.
Any copies of the tapes, any correspondence with neighbors about the issue, any journals etc that Greg or Travis kept, they'll be looking for evidence that Greg or Travis had had any sort of contact with arbery other than what they've stated (such as photographs of surveillance. not to say there are any but it would be on the list of relevant things) or that Arbery had contact with McMichaels or his family in ways unknown say for instance if he was ****ing McMichael's daughter or wife. Etc.
That's not desperation. They're murder suspects its literally SOP.
He has seen the night tapes which do not even show criminal trespass much less a burglary. He was not aware at the time of the chase that Arbery had been at the construction site that day.
That would not give Greg reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion to suspect arbery had just committed a felony and was fleeing it just because he saw him run past his house.
See Terry v Ohio. Law enforcement can use RAS to initiate an investigatory stop. Bonded law enforcement and private citizens are two different ducks. Not to mention you're asserting as a given the necessary predicate (reasonable suspicion) which Greg McMichael is unable to make.
Additionally: I see that your writing here is entirely devoid of any legal points in rebuttal. Interesting.
Separate names with a comma.