Ahmaud Arbery Shooting

[tvc184]

4 hours ago, Big girl said:

Didn't they charge those guys with unlawful detainment; as well ?

 No and there is likely no need. If like Texas, lesser included crimes are served concurrently. Let’s say a guy is convicted of Murder and then unlawful restraint in the same incident. He gets 50 years on the Murder and 5 on the unlawful restraint. He doesn’t do 5 years after the Murder sentence. The first 5 years of his time is the first 5 if Murder and the entire time for the restraint. Like locally you might here a guy get three 10 year sentences. That is 30 years but he will only have to do 10. All three sentences will be served at the same time. 

 What I suspect will happen is that the state attorney might use the unlawful detention (if they determine that it was) as the evidence needed for the Murder charge. If no authority to arrest them no lawful use of force. 

[tvc184]

4 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

I see what you’re saying. It seems like a stretch to me based on the limited information at hand. By your theory you could charge the guy that sold the gas that was used in the pickup to chase the man who was shot. 
 

It reminds me of the George Zimmerman case and makes me wonder if the 911 dispatcher told him to stand down. 
 

Gut feel from you... does it SEEM to you like the state is reaching at this point? That’s my impression, but I’m probably biased. 

That isn’t correct for the gas salesman unless he knew that they were going to commit a crime with it. It is intent. 

 The video guy took intentional action as part of the incident. He wasn’t a guy on the porch who happened to catch the action. In the example I gave it was two guys breaking into cars and one guy selling it to a third who knew the property was stolen. They all knowingly took part in crimes. 

 The guy selling gas had no clue. 

Zimmerman complied with the dispatcher (who has no authority to give him an order). Legally it wouldn’t have mattered but Zimmerman complied. 

i don’t think the state is reaching however without actually knowing the evidence, it is a complete guess. Let’s play what if.....  what if 3 guys see Arbery prowling around. It is suspicious but not a crime. So the three get together and say, let’s teach this guy a lesson. Or perhaps they say, we don’t know what he is up to but maybe he is the guy that has been committing crimes in this area. In either case they have no probable cause to arrest. I read the GA citizen arrest law and it says witnesses a crime, not suspects a crime and can detain like an officer. So the video guy in either case says, great and I will video and tell you where he runs. 

 Under that scenario, video guy is directly involved in the outcome. If so, it sure isn’t reaching. If “all” the guy did was video and took no part in the attempted detention, it is a reach. 

[ladybug33]

And here we go again.

 

 

 

[baddog]

2 hours ago, ladybug33 said:

And here we go again.

 

 

 

For crying out loud...HE WAS RELEASED!!!!!!! How does a simple detainment, until the facts are straightened out, make the news.......because he is black. The police should announce they will stop policing blacks. Let’s see how that goes.

[SmashMouth]

57 minutes ago, baddog said:

For crying out loud...HE WAS RELEASED!!!!!!! How does a simple detainment, until the facts are straightened out, make the news.......because he is black. The police should announce they will stop policing blacks. Let’s see how that goes.

baddog, if we are being honest, if he was a white dude in the same clothes and mask and in the same neighborhood, there’s a pretty good chance Johnny Law woulda kept driving by... As far as it being “in the news”, that particular clip wasn’t exactly on a mainstream channel either. If a cop does that to me in front of my own freakin house with the claim that I was “littering”, I’m probably going to jail after all the names in the book I’m gonna use on him. 

[ladybug33]

There is a difference between Policing and racial profiling. The Doctor was racial profiled. 

Constitutional policing ensures that law enforcement officers treat everyone fairly and impartially. Constitutional policing operates within the boundaries set by the Constitution, court decisions, laws, and regulations. But correct constitutional policing is more than just policies that hold up in court.

This police officer will lose in court.

[SmashMouth]

4 minutes ago, ladybug33 said:

There is a difference between Policing and racial profiling. The Doctor was racial profiled. 

Constitutional policing ensures that law enforcement officers treat everyone fairly and impartially. Constitutional policing operates within the boundaries set by the Constitution, court decisions, laws, and regulations. But correct constitutional policing is more than just policies that hold up in court.

This police officer will lose in court.

 

I think you’re incorrect. There won’t be a court appearance. He let the dude go. And he shouldn’t be brought up on charges. He’s trying to do his job. He might get in trouble at work though. If you have a child with you and a Pit Bull comes across your path, wouldn’t you be prone to getting that the child out of the path of that perceived violent dog? It may be the friendliest dog in the world, but you’re not taking any chances. I’m not saying it’s fair, but it is a conditioned response. Perhaps the black community could work on perception control through example. 

[ladybug33]

Yes to both a civil law suit has been filed, and he is in trouble at work.

[ladybug33]

I will just wait to see how this thing plays out. The officer has 12 complaints against him.

[SmashMouth]

3 minutes ago, ladybug33 said:

I will just wait to see how this thing plays out. The officer has 12 complaints against him.

That’s a different story. On just this one instance, I would not think a court appearance would be warranted. 

[THE DUDE]

27 minutes ago, ladybug33 said:

Yes to both a civil law suit has been filed, and he is in trouble at work.

if you want to talk about this topic you should start a new thread and not hijack this one. i might even go comment on that thread.

 

back on topic: i want to hear more about the sweet innocent jogger.

i wonder what his mile pace was? 

[SmashMouth]

10 minutes ago, THE DUDE said:

if you want to talk about this topic you should start a new thread and not hijack this one. i might even go comment on that thread.

 

back on topic: i want to hear more about the sweet innocent jogger.

i wonder what his mile pace was? 

Really not funny. He lost the race though. Came in dead last. 

[THE DUDE]

6 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

Really not funny. He lost the race though. Came in dead last. 

well if he was an avid jogger like they say i am sure he talked about his split times with friends and family. 

when i ran 4-5 times a week i kept up with my times so i could improve.

[Kountzer]

Mr. Arbery is dead & gone.  Throwing more dirt on his grave is useless.  He cannot feel it.

[CardinalBacker]

I watched a press conference given by the GBI yesterday on this case. The speaker said something like “sometimes people do things that are foolish and that we as a society frown upon... that does not make them illegal.”  Or something to that effect.  It was an interesting choice of words and I’d never heard that idea expressed like that before. 
 

[Kountzer]

 

The church won't be opening today, despite what the potus had to say, or maybe because of it. Stream broadcast on FB as usual.  It will probably reopen 6/6.  

[AggiesAreWe]

20 minutes ago, Kountzer said:

 

The church won't be opening today, despite what the potus had to say, or maybe because of it. Stream broadcast on FB as usual.  It will probably reopen 6/6.  

What does this post have to do with the topic of this thread?

[baddog]

15 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

baddog, if we are being honest, if he was a white dude in the same clothes and mask and in the same neighborhood, there’s a pretty good chance Johnny Law woulda kept driving by... As far as it being “in the news”, that particular clip wasn’t exactly on a mainstream channel either. If a cop does that to me in front of my own freakin house with the claim that I was “littering”, I’m probably going to jail after all the names in the book I’m gonna use on him. 

My last comment on this matter. Should be on another thread.

Funny how my security cameras don't zoom in and out.

[PAMFAM10]

It’s dehumanizing. Blacks  or more violent so you can see why I shot him. We’ve been having break ins so you should understand. He might be a teen but he was bigger and stronger. He looked out of place. He smoked weed once he had a criminal record. IF HE WOULD OF JUST LET ME DEHUMANIZE HIM WITHOUT REACTION HE’LL STILL BE ALIVE.

[SmashMouth]

19 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

It’s dehumanizing. Blacks  or more violent so you can see why I shot him. We’ve been having break ins so you should understand. He might be a teen but he was bigger and stronger. He looked out of place. He smoked weed once he had a criminal record. IF HE WOULD OF JUST LET ME DEHUMANIZE HIM WITHOUT REACTION HE’LL STILL BE ALIVE.

A lot of truth in what you say. It goes both ways too though. There’s got to be a middle ground. 

[tvc184]

19 hours ago, baddog said:

For crying out loud...HE WAS RELEASED!!!!!!! How does a simple detainment, until the facts are straightened out, make the news.......because he is black. The police should announce they will stop policing blacks. Let’s see how that goes.

Be should have never been in handcuffs. Releasing him later doesn’t right the wrong. 

I would like to see if he had body cam video. If the officer is really demanding that he be called sergeant, he has serious issues and might need to seek a different profession. 

 We don’t have all the facts but from the appearance of it, this looks like an unlawful detention. Now,, waiting for the other side if the story is one exists....

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, SmashMouth said:

A lot of truth in what you say. It goes both ways too though. There’s got to be a middle ground. 

There should be no middle ground on constitutional rights. There is no give and take. 

[SmashMouth]

26 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

There should be no middle ground on constitutional rights. There is no give and take. 

The middle ground I’m speaking of is not in reference to a person’s rights. It relates to racial tension and the inane excuses that each side uses against each other. 

[ladybug33]

I was not trying to hijack this thread period!!  Here is a video that explains some of the complaints, or mis-leading facts that are linked to this case.

 

[baddog]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

Be should have never been in handcuffs. Releasing him later doesn’t right the wrong. 

I would like to see if he had body cam video. If the officer is really demanding that he be called sergeant, he has serious issues and might need to seek a different profession. 

 We don’t have all the facts but from the appearance of it, this looks like an unlawful detention. Now,, waiting for the other side if the story is one exists....

Seen a lot of episodes of “Cops” where people were told they were not under arrest but that the cuffs were for the officer’s protection until they could sort things out. How confusing. I don’t agree with cops arresting people for Covid non-conformance, but this one made the news for the racial impact. Just another day in the life had he been white.