Posted on 05/07/2020 5:46:59 PM PDT by Trump20162020
Where were you when you witnessed him fleeing as you described it?
From what College of Law do you hold a Juris Prudence Degree?
Nope. Entirely different circumstances,
I never said a word about a law regarding behavior.
If someone you suspect of a crime suddenly comes at you, physically attacks you and attempts to physically disarm you, I would guess the person with the gun felt directly threatened by that. Is that not a reasonable assumption?
The fact that they initiated the contact which was illegal at that point in time because they were not sworn law enforcement Officers and had no authority to use deadly force or the threat of deadly force negates any claim of self defense they had. Regardless of what ensued./p>
thanks
Well were talking about 2 different things. I am talking about the video evidence and the shooting event depicted in the video, including the 15 or 20 seconds or so leading up to it. You’re talking about the legality of the citizens arrest which appears to have never happened anyway.
Btw, you’re free to answer the question at #205.
The question assumes facts not in evidence.
LOL! Nice duck n dodge. Come on now, answer the legitimate question. Stop evading.
>>If someone you suspect of a crime suddenly comes at you, physically attacks you and attempts to physically disarm you, I would guess the person with the gun felt directly threatened by that. Is that not a reasonable assumption?
To get back to your question, you need to be more specific. The Law deals in specifics, not generalities. /p>
I can't imagine the decedent being out for a nice innocent jog one minute, then in an instant, running about 60++ feet, not away from, but right towards a neighbor holding a shotgun, then attacks him, while attempting to disarm him. I find that very odd, in fact I find that behavior highly suspect.
From my perspective, that's close to a decision to commit suicide on Ahmaud Arbery's part.
Btw, I have no idea on where a trial would go, but I know the defense is going to have a hell of a time explaining the decedents behavior and actions depicted in that video.
You can actually see the decedent at one point going right at the neighbor with the gun, on the drivers side of the truck, driver door open, then he does a quick pivot right, running to the right at the rear of the truck, then up the passenger side of the truck, pivots left in front the truck, and goes right in for the attack on the neighbor with the gun.
I reviewed the video very closely.
The 64 dollar question will be: How will the State of Georgia look at it? They should be a preliminary hearing coming up. The State will have to show enough of its cards to establish a prima facie case. Some Jurisdictions refer to them as probable cause hearings. If the State gets past the preliminary hearing, the trial should be interesting. At one time the GBI guys were pretty sharp. I don’t know how they are now.
Without any more evidence other than the video, I have no idea what Georgia or anyone else will do in this case. But I called the Martin/Zimmerman case. Same with Wilson/Brown shooting in Ferguson. I knew they were going to find Zimmerman not guilty, and Wilson would walk, yet half the country had them guilty and wanted them hung.
That is where you err because the defense does not have to explain or prove anything. As long as Criminal Courts and Civil Courts are conducted under the guidelines set forth in the Constitution the Defendant is assumed to be Innocent until proven guilty. To the exclusion of a reasonable doubt in Criminal Court and a preponderance of evidence in Civil Court. The Defendant can remain absolutely mute for the duration of the trial. However, if it goes to trial, the decedent won't have to prove or explain anything. The State or People of Georgia will be the Plaintiff and the Father Son Team will be the Defendants. And the State will not have to prove why they killed him [motive] only that they[ Father and Son] killed him [the jogger]perhaps they will plead out. They should take it all the way through and hope for a Not Guilty Verdict or a hung jury. After two consecutive hung juries Judges in a lot of Jurisdictions will, if asked by the defense. invoke Double Jeopardy
They were different circumstances. Zimmerman had a legal right to be where was. His story matched the facts of the case. I don’t know enough about the Wilson-Brown case to comment.
Saying “stop we just want to talk to you” is NOT ordering someone to stop.
Yelling “STOP! STOP IT!” at someone charging you is a WARNING. Don’t come at me.
You are confusing the events. Go listen to the 911 call and watch the videos again and employ critical thinking skills.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.