Tweet
There are multiple surveillance videos that show Ahmaud Arbery trespassing on the construction site, at least a few times at night. The owner installed the cameras because he had valuable shit go missing in the past. The very morning that Arbery was killed, he was seen inside the house and he took off running when he got noticed. That's when the neighbors called the cops. That Armaud Arbery was "jogging" is a 100% proven lie. Beyond anything remotely resembling a reasonable doubt. It's a lie as brazen as "hands up, don't shoot!" and the Covington Catholic High School kids. He wasn't a "jogger". He wasn't wearing jogging clothes and he wasn't jogging. He was running away from the house that he snuck into after he got noticed. He was a thief, and he had a criminal record to match. There is bodycam footage of him and his idiot buddies getting arrested for trying to steal a 65" TV from Wal Mart and there is also bodycam footage of him becoming extremely aggressive with cops like a complete shithead, so badly that they had to try and tase him. The Liberal media is showing a heavily doctored and edited version of this video that mysteriously edits out his most aggressive behavior. Here is the actual full unedited video of the incident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7RmbadxRII Arbery wasn't "lynched". He wasn't "murdered" or killed for "jogging while black". He was stopped by people who had immediate knowledge of him having committed a crime and were attempting to hold him under citizen's arrest until the cops arrived. He was killed because like Michael Brown, he decided to rush at an armed man and take his gun away instead of just complying with his instructions. The media narrative on this story is as brazenly dishonest as it gets.
-
-
As I said:
The problem the vigilantes have is that they told police they "believed" Arbery was a suspect in a string of burglaries in the community. Belief is NOT knowledge. Belief is suspicion. Nothing in Hannibal's post changes that fact. Nothing in Hannibal's post changes the above analysis. NOTHING. You can't just say they had immediate knowledge. You have to prove it (it's an affirmative defense, so the burden is on them).To summarize -- these are the arguments the defendants have to make and win to avoid going to jail:
(1) Yes, we the initiated the confrontation, but we had no intent to kill him. Probably a winner.
(2) Yes, we were the aggressor, but we were justified in being the aggressor because we thought he committed a crime. Under Georgia law, they must have committed the crime in the presence of the person or they person must have immediate knowledge of the crime.. So, I think they can lose right here (and should). The Court could probably rule on this issue as a matter of law (jury wouldn't decide if that happens). If they lose on this issue then they never get to (3).
(3) Ok, we didn't initiate with intent to kill and we weren't the aggressor because we thought he committed a crime AND we had a reasonable fear that he'd do us seriously bodily harm because.....umm....he attacked us (even though we were armed and he wasn't). This is a jury question. If it gets this far, then who knows what a jury does with this.Last edited by iam416; May 21, 2020, 09:55 AM.Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.Comment
-
They might end up skating because they've been charged with murder right? Manslaughter probably would've been an easier case.
BTW, the same surveillance cameras that showed Arbery entering the construction site (and never actually taking anything) also showed multiple other people entering the site without permission and snooping around.Comment
-
..."The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham LincolnComment
-
Talent -- they had immediate knowledge. He was there that morning, they saw him, and he had been there at least a few times before, at least a few times at night. His own family has admitted that it was him on the video. You don't have to steal anything for it to be criminal behavior. If you break into a property and you can't' find anything of value to steal, it doesn't mean that you didn't commit a crime.Comment
-
That's not immediate knowledge. That's, at best, knowledge they had and sat on until night. They should have called the police in the interim if they had knowledge. Then they saw someone at night. They need to establish they KNEW it was the same person. In their statements to the police they did not say the KNEW Arbery was a suspect. They believed he was. That's not enough. Further, to reiterate, the immediacy is the key. You can't witness a crime and wait 5 days to effect a citizen's arrest. A citizen's arrest is intended as a stop-gap for an immediate situation when the police can't be involved and the suspect may get away.Talent -- they had immediate knowledge. He was there that morning, they saw him,
In any event, that's the issue. And, again, it's their burden to prove.Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.Comment
-
Not the topic at hand but I've seen a lot of chatter this morning that Chechen strongman Ramzan Kadyrov has flown to Moscow for treatment and is believed to have covid19. After Putin he's probably the most feared man in Russia. And even Putin has trouble controlling him.Comment
-
Talent -- they did call the police. Their intent was to hold the guy until they got there.Comment
-
They didn't call the police in the morning. That's a problem. The lag. They didn't KNOW. They believed. That's another problem. Their arrest was based on nothing immediate nor nothing known.
But, look, if the facts are as clear as you think then it's a slam dunk at trial for them. Again, they have to prove immediate knowledge, but if it's that clear then it shouldn't be a problem.
From what I know, it seems like they'll have a challenge, but I'm certainly not privy to all the facts and details.Last edited by iam416; May 21, 2020, 10:16 AM.Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.Comment
-
And look, it's quite possible (and likely) that the victim wasn't a saint nor simply out for a jog. I fully appreciate the likelihood of an inaccurate narrative. However, that doesn't mean the defendants don't have some concerns with meeting their burden of proof to establish self-defense. And I think they have a real issue there.Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.Comment
-
..."The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham LincolnComment
-
If you and your son roll up on me in a pickup truck, train a few guns on me, and demand I halt and talk to you, it's hard to see how I am the one being the aggressor and anything they do after that point is "self-defense". They aren't cops.
I guess the defense might argue that the confrontation didn't actually start until Arbery resisted "arrest"
BTW the guy who actually owns the construction site (or his lawyer anyway) has already gone on the record to say that not so much as a screwdriver has ever gone missing and there's never been any damage.
Comment
-
AA - StifleComment
-
I hereby re-up the stifle AA request. For the good of humanity.Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.Comment
-
..."The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham LincolnComment
Comment