All 3 defendants found guilty of murdering Ahmaud Arbery

a reply to: putnam6

Good, justice is served. End of story.

How can it be any more or less clear-cut than that? The only folks who are going to argue otherwise, are still looking to milk it either way. Those people are low-hanging fruit anyway, though.

originally posted by: network dude
So no riots? Or will Portland riot in celebration?

I don't disagree with this ending. But the racial division really has to stop. It's the rhetoric from the extremes on both sides that causes things like this to happen.

Yea it really does, it's slowly changing, but it seems really slow especially to other communities Not to mention places like Brunswick Georgia people get isolated, and old stereotypes and prejudices abound especially in times of turmoil. It doesn't excuse their action at all, it's just the reality 100's if not thousands of communities isolated in their thoughts and beliefs of all races religions, and creeds.

It is no different than that tribe of people on the island off the coast of India will kill anybody that sets foot on the island. You become a product of your environment, your upbringing.

I know it's not changing quickly enough for some, while others will fight it tooth and nail every step of the way.

I don't think the guy that took the video should have been convicted, however the other two did not have much defense to stand on, the law was not on their side on this, so other than the guy who took the video, I think it was a fairly just verdict.

originally posted by: Tempter
Did the court case establish whether or not he was actually jogging or was he there to steal?

He wasn't out for a jog. But that doesn't really matter in this case. He was almost certainly looking for things to steal, but again, that also doesn't matter.

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Of course they did even though only one man pulled the trigger....


a reply to: putnam6

I suggest reading Georgia laws here. I'd say the last paragraph of this post is where they got the 3rd man videotaping is pertinent but I am sure we will have more knowledgeable persons who might have different conclusions.

codes.findlaw.com...


abcnews.go.com...

WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MALICE MURDER AND FELONY MURDER?

Unlike many states, Georgia doesn't have degrees of murder, but instead has malice murder and felony murder. Neither requires prosecutors to prove an intent to kill.

Malice murder is when a person “unlawfully and with malice aforethought, either express or implied, causes the death of another human being.” No evidence of premeditation is required.

Express malice involves an intent to kill. Implied malice is when the there is “no considerable provocation” and the circumstances of the killing “show an abandoned and malignant heart,” which essentially means the person has acted with extreme recklessness even if there was no intent to kill, said Georgia State University law professor Russell Covey.

Felony murder applies when someone who has no plans to kill intentionally commits another felony and a person dies as a result. The person must be convicted of the underlying felony to be found guilty of felony murder.

On odd thing stood out to me in this trail. One of the defense attnys closing arguments made a derogatory eference to the victims long dirty toenails. What a weird thing to say. Such a thing might of really rubbed the jury wrong. Was dhe setting up a reason to appeal? WTF was she trying to pull?

originally posted by: BrujaRebooted
On odd thing stood out to me in this trail. One of the defense attnys closing arguments made a derogatory eference to the victims long dirty toenails. What a weird thing to say. Such a thing might of really rubbed the jury wrong. Was dhe setting up a reason to appeal? WTF was she trying to pull?

It has been mentioned it was an attempt to infer he was supposedly a jogger and was shoeless I believe.

originally posted by: Nyiah
a reply to: putnam6

Good, justice is served. End of story.

Not yet. Even though found guilty, they have the right of appeal.

www.lawyers.com...

a reply to: putnam6

Sockless, I heard.

He may have been interested in construction methods, for all anyone knows.

This was vigilantism, at the best, racism and hatred at the worst. Jury was correct.

Most if not all states have accomplice liability laws. For example, if three of y'all got together to rob me, my state also has castle law. Lets say I hypothetically kill one of y'all in defense of property. Under accomplice liability laws, the other two would be guilty of murder.

theappeal.org...

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: BrujaRebooted
On odd thing stood out to me in this trail. One of the defense attnys closing arguments made a derogatory eference to the victims long dirty toenails. What a weird thing to say. Such a thing might of really rubbed the jury wrong. Was dhe setting up a reason to appeal? WTF was she trying to pull?

It has been mentioned it was an attempt to infer he was supposedly a jogger and was shoeless I believe.

He wasn't shoeless.

However, cameras in the construction site he entered shortly before his death show that he was indeed wearing running shoes. Moreover, The New York Post published an article discussing the autopsy report. The author explains that the report revealed, “Arbery was wearing a white t-shirt, tan cargo shorts, gray athletic shoes and two tan bandannas — all of which were bloodstained.”

redstate.com...

The info about his toenails comes from the autopsy report.

originally posted by: Randyvine2
a reply to: putnam6

I can't judge at all because I'm not a part of the jury. However to me
who ever pulled the trigger committed murder and should fry for it.
Didn't they go home and go to bed after they killed this kid? It doesn't
get much colder than that.

As far as the shooter goes, he should be facing life, fair verdict if I was on the jury.

The other two for their part in the assault perhaps with a murder involved are dragged over the line?

It does seem that they didn't pull the trigger was considered if they were assaulting this young man. His and their skin color shouldn't be in the mix but it is. I don't care what color he was. These guys assaulted him and one shot him to death.

a reply to: Randyvine2
Agreed.

The local PD did nothing until the video went public.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: BrujaRebooted
On odd thing stood out to me in this trail. One of the defense attnys closing arguments made a derogatory eference to the victims long dirty toenails. What a weird thing to say. Such a thing might of really rubbed the jury wrong. Was dhe setting up a reason to appeal? WTF was she trying to pull?

It has been mentioned it was an attempt to infer he was supposedly a jogger and was shoeless I believe.

He wasn't shoeless.

However, cameras in the construction site he entered shortly before his death show that he was indeed wearing running shoes. Moreover, The New York Post published an article discussing the autopsy report. The author explains that the report revealed, “Arbery was wearing a white t-shirt, tan cargo shorts, gray athletic shoes and two tan bandannas — all of which were bloodstained.”

redstate.com...

The info about his toenails comes from the autopsy report.

You are correct, LOL I repeated what I heard from our local news expert

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yes, he was wearing "tennis shoes" or "sneakers", they were certainly not "running shoes" or "jogging shoes". That was a common misnomer in this case.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Tempter

Does it matter?

Even if he had been slinging heroin to school children, the fact that he was hunted down and executed still makes it murder.

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: Tempter
Did the court case establish whether or not he was actually jogging or was he there to steal?

I heard that angle, but unless he was threatening the shooter or physically harming someone else, It doesn't justify taking a man's life.

The shooter said in open court under questioning that Aubery didn't threaten him. That sealed the case just like the testimony of Gaige in the Rittenhouse trial, saying Rittenhouse didn't shoot him till he raised his gun and advanced on him.

It's clear in the video Aubery wasn't approaching the shooter.

I'm not disagreeing with the verdict or even challenging it. I simply want to know if what they murdered was a piece of crap or not.

a reply to: Justoneman

These guys assaulted him and one shot him to death.

No room in the world for useless cowards who don't respect life.
All other mentions aside.

a reply to: Randyvine2

Justice was Served . He was Not a Threat but Killed Anyway . 3 Dumb Mice .

a reply to: Tempter

Doesn't matter. Once he fled they were wrong for pursuing. They should have taken the video evidence to the police and let them handle it from there. My personal opinion, yeah he was probably scoping the place out to steal stuff. That doesn't change the fact that once he fled, was no danger to them. No self defence in this case and apparently the jury agreed.

originally posted by: Tempter

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Tempter

Does it matter?

Even if he had been slinging heroin to school children, the fact that he was hunted down and executed still makes it murder.

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: Tempter
Did the court case establish whether or not he was actually jogging or was he there to steal?

I heard that angle, but unless he was threatening the shooter or physically harming someone else, It doesn't justify taking a man's life.

The shooter said in open court under questioning that Aubery didn't threaten him. That sealed the case just like the testimony of Gaige in the Rittenhouse trial, saying Rittenhouse didn't shoot him till he raised his gun and advanced on him.

It's clear in the video Aubery wasn't approaching the shooter.

I'm not disagreeing with the verdict or even challenging it. I simply want to know if what they murdered was a piece of crap or not.

He had some stuff nothing major...

Mr Arbery received five years of probation in high school for a first-time firearms offence and was convicted of probation violation for stealing in 2018, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

It was revealed that a Glynn County cop attempted to tase him in 2017 after he refused to allow them to check his car in a park.

The interaction was captured on police bodycam footage. Officers stated that he was in a car in an area notorious for drug use. He stated that he was taking the day off from work. He was permitted to flee on foot after the taser malfunctioned.
However

rollingout.com...

A judge ruled on Sept. 1 that he will not allow Ahmaud Arbery’s character to be dragged in court as his alleged killers await trial.


In a written order, Superior Court Judge Timothy Walmsley ruled that Arbery’s past criminal history cannot be used and is not relevant to the actions that led to his death.

The judge ruled that Arbery’s past run-ins with the law could unfairly “lead the jury to believe that although Arbery did not apparently commit any felony that day, he may pose future dangerousness in that he would eventually commit more alleged crimes, and therefore, the Defendants’ actions were somehow justified. The character of the victim is neither relevant nor admissible in a murder trial,” the judge wrote in his ruling.