New development in the shooting case of the black georgia jogger

[Canon Shooter]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

 

[Norman]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Reasonable suspicion is enough. For someone who lives in Georgia you certainly don't know the law, and apparently can't even read the thread since the law was already posted here.

By the way, fleeing itself can generate reasonable suspicion. Of course in this case, the suspicion turned out to be correct. It's also possible that they heard screams for the man to stop.

 

[Canon Shooter]

That is not why the Prosecutor is going to be defending his law license. It is because he decided to Recuse himself and still issued instructions to the police. That is misconduct.

Blah, blah, blah... It is clear the white men did nothing wrong. The black man charged at a shotgun and paid the price for it.

This is what all already concluded until the crazy SJWs got a sniff of the case as if it was young girl near Biden.

That you respond with "blahblahblah" illustrates only one of two things: that you're devoid of anything intelligent to add, or you understand that SavannahMann is right.

Gregory and Travis McMichael are going to be found guilty. All of your racist whining isn't change that...

 

[Norman]

That is not why the Prosecutor is going to be defending his law license. It is because he decided to Recuse himself and still issued instructions to the police. That is misconduct.

Blah, blah, blah... It is clear the white men did nothing wrong. The black man charged at a shotgun and paid the price for it.

This is what all already concluded until the crazy SJWs got a sniff of the case as if it was young girl near Biden.

That you respond with "blahblahblah" illustrates only one of two things: that you're devoid of anything intelligent to add, or you understand that SavannahMann is right.

Gregory and Travis McMichael are going to be found guilty. All of your racist whining isn't change that...

More blah, blah, blah.

They did nothing wrong, that's the fact.

 

[Meathead]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Bull, you said, and I quote, "...if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense."

The same people who were Constitutional experts 3 months, viral epidemiologists last month are now experts on Georgia state law.

 

[SavannahMann]

That is not why the Prosecutor is going to be defending his law license. It is because he decided to Recuse himself and still issued instructions to the police. That is misconduct.

Blah, blah, blah... It is clear the white men did nothing wrong. The black man charged at a shotgun and paid the price for it.

This is what all already concluded until the crazy SJWs got a sniff of the case as if it was young girl near Biden.

That you respond with "blahblahblah" illustrates only one of two things: that you're devoid of anything intelligent to add, or you understand that SavannahMann is right.

Gregory and Travis McMichael are going to be found guilty. All of your racist whining isn't change that...

More blah, blah, blah.

They did nothing wrong, that's the fact.

OK. Lets deal with the link I shared. Why would an experienced Defense Attorney who has argued before the State Supreme Court disagree with you?

 

[Norman]

That is not why the Prosecutor is going to be defending his law license. It is because he decided to Recuse himself and still issued instructions to the police. That is misconduct.

Blah, blah, blah... It is clear the white men did nothing wrong. The black man charged at a shotgun and paid the price for it.

This is what all already concluded until the crazy SJWs got a sniff of the case as if it was young girl near Biden.

That you respond with "blahblahblah" illustrates only one of two things: that you're devoid of anything intelligent to add, or you understand that SavannahMann is right.

Gregory and Travis McMichael are going to be found guilty. All of your racist whining isn't change that...

More blah, blah, blah.

They did nothing wrong, that's the fact.

OK. Lets deal with the link I shared. Why would an experienced Defense Attorney who has argued before the State Supreme Court disagree with you?

As I said before, initially no charges were brought up. It was clear cut to all, including the prosecutor that no wrongdoing occurred.

 

[Canon Shooter]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Reasonable suspicion is enough. For someone who lives in Georgia you certainly don't know the law, and apparently can't even read the thread since the law was already posted here.

By the way, fleeing itself can generate reasonable suspicion. Of course in this case, the suspicion turned out to be correct. It's also possible that they heard screams for the man to stop.

Well, if anyone needed further proof that you're a no-nothing dipshit, you just provided it here, dumbass.

I don't live in Georgia, and I've never claimed to.

I read from the Georgia Bar Association website:

"Citizen’s Arrests - As a private citizen, you have no authority to arrest anyone with a warrant. Without a warrant, you may arrest anyone who commits a misdemeanor or a felony in your presence or with your immediate knowledge. A citizen’s arrest occurs when a citizen prevents a suspect from leaving a scene. Citizen’s arrest most often happens in cases like shoplifting, when the store’s manager detains the suspected offender."

https://www.gabar.org/forthepublic/forteachersstudents/lre/teacherresources/upload/ch16.pdf

Arbery committed no crime in the presence of Travis McMichael, nor did Travis McMichael have immediate knowledge of any crime committed by Arbery. An example of "immediate knowledge" would be, say, a woman yelling to you that the guy running away from her carrying a woman's purse just stole her purse.

But, just for fun, let's pretend that Travis McMichael was in a position to legally perform a citizen's arrest of Arbery. The law in Georgia states: "When making a citizen’s arrest, a person may not use more force than is reasonable to make the arrest. Deadly force is limited to self-defense or to instances in which such force is necessary to prevent certain felonies."

Hopping out of the truck with a gun is clearly not the use of a minimum amount of force. In fact it's an unwarranted escalation of force for someone who's running down the road. So, as soon as his feet hit the ground he fucked up.

Now, even though you're too ignorant to wrap your head around this, we already know there's no legitimate claim to self-defense, simply because Travis and Gregory McMichael initiated the entire incident.

Lastly, deadly force is authorized to prevent someone from committing certain felonies, but not all. It's a felony to embezzle money from an employer. Deadly force is not authorized to stop it. Likewise, if Arbery had stolen something from a construction site days prior, that felony has not only already been committed, but it was committed outside the view or knowledge of Travis McMichael.

But none of those things are what happened.

I know you're not a fan of facts, but there ya' go...

 

[SavannahMann]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Reasonable suspicion is enough. For someone who lives in Georgia you certainly don't know the law, and apparently can't even read the thread since the law was already posted here.

By the way, fleeing itself can generate reasonable suspicion. Of course in this case, the suspicion turned out to be correct. It's also possible that they heard screams for the man to stop.

As was the opinion of several lawyers who say that the McMichaels did not have Reasonable Suspicion by Georgia Law.

 

[Norman]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Reasonable suspicion is enough. For someone who lives in Georgia you certainly don't know the law, and apparently can't even read the thread since the law was already posted here.

By the way, fleeing itself can generate reasonable suspicion. Of course in this case, the suspicion turned out to be correct. It's also possible that they heard screams for the man to stop.

Well, if anyone needed further proof that you're a no-nothing dipshit, you just provided it here, dumbass.

I don't live in Georgia, and I've never claimed to.

I read from the Georgia Bar Association website:

"Citizen’s Arrests - As a private citizen, you have no authority to arrest anyone with a warrant. Without a warrant, you may arrest anyone who commits a misdemeanor or a felony in your presence or with your immediate knowledge. A citizen’s arrest occurs when a citizen prevents a suspect from leaving a scene. Citizen’s arrest most often happens in cases like shoplifting, when the store’s manager detains the suspected offender."

https://www.gabar.org/forthepublic/forteachersstudents/lre/teacherresources/upload/ch16.pdf

Arbery committed no crime in the presence of Travis McMichael, nor did Travis McMichael have immediate knowledge of any crime committed by Arbery. An example of "immediate knowledge" would be, say, a woman yelling to you that the guy running away from her carrying a woman's purse just stole her purse.

But, just for fun, let's pretend that Travis McMichael was in a position to legally perform a citizen's arrest of Arbery. The law in Georgia states: "When making a citizen’s arrest, a person may not use more force than is reasonable to make the arrest. Deadly force is limited to self-defense or to instances in which such force is necessary to prevent certain felonies."

Hopping out of the truck with a gun is clearly not the use of a minimum amount of force. In fact it's an unwarranted escalation of force for someone who's running down the road. So, as soon as his feet hit the ground he fucked up.

Now, even though you're too ignorant to wrap your head around this, we already know there's no legitimate claim to self-defense, simply because Travis and Gregory McMichael initiated the entire incident.

Lastly, deadly force is authorized to prevent someone from committing certain felonies, but not all. It's a felony to embezzle money from an employer. Deadly force is not authorized to stop it. Likewise, if Arbery had stolen something from a construction site days prior, that felony has not only already been committed, but it was committed outside the view or knowledge of Travis McMichael.

But none of those things are what happened.

I know you're not a fan of facts, but there ya' go...

I already posted the law it allows for arrest for only reasonable suspicion if someone is fleeing.

Stop spreading your fake news sources.

 

[Canon Shooter]

That is not why the Prosecutor is going to be defending his law license. It is because he decided to Recuse himself and still issued instructions to the police. That is misconduct.

Blah, blah, blah... It is clear the white men did nothing wrong. The black man charged at a shotgun and paid the price for it.

This is what all already concluded until the crazy SJWs got a sniff of the case as if it was young girl near Biden.

That you respond with "blahblahblah" illustrates only one of two things: that you're devoid of anything intelligent to add, or you understand that SavannahMann is right.

Gregory and Travis McMichael are going to be found guilty. All of your racist whining isn't change that...

More blah, blah, blah.

They did nothing wrong, that's the fact.

OK. Lets deal with the link I shared. Why would an experienced Defense Attorney who has argued before the State Supreme Court disagree with you?

As I said before, initially no charges were brought up. It was clear cut to all, including the prosecutor that no wrongdoing occurred.

I see.

So the very first decision made by a prosecutor is the decision which is infallibly correct?

 

[Meathead]

As was the opinion of several lawyers who say that the McMichaels did not have Reasonable Suspicion by Georgia Law.

LOL

 

[Canon Shooter]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Reasonable suspicion is enough. For someone who lives in Georgia you certainly don't know the law, and apparently can't even read the thread since the law was already posted here.

By the way, fleeing itself can generate reasonable suspicion. Of course in this case, the suspicion turned out to be correct. It's also possible that they heard screams for the man to stop.

Well, if anyone needed further proof that you're a no-nothing dipshit, you just provided it here, dumbass.

I don't live in Georgia, and I've never claimed to.

I read from the Georgia Bar Association website:

"Citizen’s Arrests - As a private citizen, you have no authority to arrest anyone with a warrant. Without a warrant, you may arrest anyone who commits a misdemeanor or a felony in your presence or with your immediate knowledge. A citizen’s arrest occurs when a citizen prevents a suspect from leaving a scene. Citizen’s arrest most often happens in cases like shoplifting, when the store’s manager detains the suspected offender."

https://www.gabar.org/forthepublic/forteachersstudents/lre/teacherresources/upload/ch16.pdf

Arbery committed no crime in the presence of Travis McMichael, nor did Travis McMichael have immediate knowledge of any crime committed by Arbery. An example of "immediate knowledge" would be, say, a woman yelling to you that the guy running away from her carrying a woman's purse just stole her purse.

But, just for fun, let's pretend that Travis McMichael was in a position to legally perform a citizen's arrest of Arbery. The law in Georgia states: "When making a citizen’s arrest, a person may not use more force than is reasonable to make the arrest. Deadly force is limited to self-defense or to instances in which such force is necessary to prevent certain felonies."

Hopping out of the truck with a gun is clearly not the use of a minimum amount of force. In fact it's an unwarranted escalation of force for someone who's running down the road. So, as soon as his feet hit the ground he fucked up.

Now, even though you're too ignorant to wrap your head around this, we already know there's no legitimate claim to self-defense, simply because Travis and Gregory McMichael initiated the entire incident.

Lastly, deadly force is authorized to prevent someone from committing certain felonies, but not all. It's a felony to embezzle money from an employer. Deadly force is not authorized to stop it. Likewise, if Arbery had stolen something from a construction site days prior, that felony has not only already been committed, but it was committed outside the view or knowledge of Travis McMichael.

But none of those things are what happened.

I know you're not a fan of facts, but there ya' go...

I already posted the law it allows for arrest for only reasonable suspicion.

Stop spreading your fake news sources.

Fake news?? You don't like what it says so it's "fake news"?

You are slowly, but ever so surely, redefining the term "ignorant dipshit".

The source quoted in my post isn't a "fake news source", Zippy. It's the website for the Georgia State Bar Association.

You've just relegated yourself to "idiot clown" status. Nothing you say has value. Your opinions mean dick. You and your idiot ramblings are utterly meaningless...

 

[Norman]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Reasonable suspicion is enough. For someone who lives in Georgia you certainly don't know the law, and apparently can't even read the thread since the law was already posted here.

By the way, fleeing itself can generate reasonable suspicion. Of course in this case, the suspicion turned out to be correct. It's also possible that they heard screams for the man to stop.

Well, if anyone needed further proof that you're a no-nothing dipshit, you just provided it here, dumbass.

I don't live in Georgia, and I've never claimed to.

I read from the Georgia Bar Association website:

"Citizen’s Arrests - As a private citizen, you have no authority to arrest anyone with a warrant. Without a warrant, you may arrest anyone who commits a misdemeanor or a felony in your presence or with your immediate knowledge. A citizen’s arrest occurs when a citizen prevents a suspect from leaving a scene. Citizen’s arrest most often happens in cases like shoplifting, when the store’s manager detains the suspected offender."

https://www.gabar.org/forthepublic/forteachersstudents/lre/teacherresources/upload/ch16.pdf

Arbery committed no crime in the presence of Travis McMichael, nor did Travis McMichael have immediate knowledge of any crime committed by Arbery. An example of "immediate knowledge" would be, say, a woman yelling to you that the guy running away from her carrying a woman's purse just stole her purse.

But, just for fun, let's pretend that Travis McMichael was in a position to legally perform a citizen's arrest of Arbery. The law in Georgia states: "When making a citizen’s arrest, a person may not use more force than is reasonable to make the arrest. Deadly force is limited to self-defense or to instances in which such force is necessary to prevent certain felonies."

Hopping out of the truck with a gun is clearly not the use of a minimum amount of force. In fact it's an unwarranted escalation of force for someone who's running down the road. So, as soon as his feet hit the ground he fucked up.

Now, even though you're too ignorant to wrap your head around this, we already know there's no legitimate claim to self-defense, simply because Travis and Gregory McMichael initiated the entire incident.

Lastly, deadly force is authorized to prevent someone from committing certain felonies, but not all. It's a felony to embezzle money from an employer. Deadly force is not authorized to stop it. Likewise, if Arbery had stolen something from a construction site days prior, that felony has not only already been committed, but it was committed outside the view or knowledge of Travis McMichael.

But none of those things are what happened.

I know you're not a fan of facts, but there ya' go...

I already posted the law it allows for arrest for only reasonable suspicion.

Stop spreading your fake news sources.

Fake news?? You don't like what it says so it's "fake news"?

You are slowly, but ever so surely, redefining the term "ignorant dipshit".

The source quoted in my post isn't a "fake news source", Zippy. It's the website for the Georgia State Bar Association.

You've just relegated yourself to "idiot clown" status. Nothing you say has value. Your opinions mean dick. You and your idiot ramblings are utterly meaningless...

Whatever it is, is not the law. Looks like fake news.

Here is the law.

2010 Georgia Code :: TITLE 17 - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE :: CHAPTER 4 - ARREST OF PERSONS :: ARTICLE 4 - ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS :: § 17-4-60 - Grounds for arrest

law.justia.com

A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

 

[SavannahMann]

As was the opinion of several lawyers who say that the McMichaels did not have Reasonable Suspicion by Georgia Law.

LOL

Yeah. You guys are starting to sound like a skit from The Onion.



No matter how many people tell you the truth you just won’t accept it. Fine with me. You can claim they are political prisoners. But think about this. The longer you protest the more you sound like the far leftists you detest who refuse to accept truth. The Bernie Bro’s who act like Socialism works if the right people are in charge as one example.

 

[SavannahMann]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Reasonable suspicion is enough. For someone who lives in Georgia you certainly don't know the law, and apparently can't even read the thread since the law was already posted here.

By the way, fleeing itself can generate reasonable suspicion. Of course in this case, the suspicion turned out to be correct. It's also possible that they heard screams for the man to stop.

Well, if anyone needed further proof that you're a no-nothing dipshit, you just provided it here, dumbass.

I don't live in Georgia, and I've never claimed to.

I read from the Georgia Bar Association website:

"Citizen’s Arrests - As a private citizen, you have no authority to arrest anyone with a warrant. Without a warrant, you may arrest anyone who commits a misdemeanor or a felony in your presence or with your immediate knowledge. A citizen’s arrest occurs when a citizen prevents a suspect from leaving a scene. Citizen’s arrest most often happens in cases like shoplifting, when the store’s manager detains the suspected offender."

https://www.gabar.org/forthepublic/forteachersstudents/lre/teacherresources/upload/ch16.pdf

Arbery committed no crime in the presence of Travis McMichael, nor did Travis McMichael have immediate knowledge of any crime committed by Arbery. An example of "immediate knowledge" would be, say, a woman yelling to you that the guy running away from her carrying a woman's purse just stole her purse.

But, just for fun, let's pretend that Travis McMichael was in a position to legally perform a citizen's arrest of Arbery. The law in Georgia states: "When making a citizen’s arrest, a person may not use more force than is reasonable to make the arrest. Deadly force is limited to self-defense or to instances in which such force is necessary to prevent certain felonies."

Hopping out of the truck with a gun is clearly not the use of a minimum amount of force. In fact it's an unwarranted escalation of force for someone who's running down the road. So, as soon as his feet hit the ground he fucked up.

Now, even though you're too ignorant to wrap your head around this, we already know there's no legitimate claim to self-defense, simply because Travis and Gregory McMichael initiated the entire incident.

Lastly, deadly force is authorized to prevent someone from committing certain felonies, but not all. It's a felony to embezzle money from an employer. Deadly force is not authorized to stop it. Likewise, if Arbery had stolen something from a construction site days prior, that felony has not only already been committed, but it was committed outside the view or knowledge of Travis McMichael.

But none of those things are what happened.

I know you're not a fan of facts, but there ya' go...

I already posted the law it allows for arrest for only reasonable suspicion.

Stop spreading your fake news sources.

Fake news?? You don't like what it says so it's "fake news"?

You are slowly, but ever so surely, redefining the term "ignorant dipshit".

The source quoted in my post isn't a "fake news source", Zippy. It's the website for the Georgia State Bar Association.

You've just relegated yourself to "idiot clown" status. Nothing you say has value. Your opinions mean dick. You and your idiot ramblings are utterly meaningless...

Whatever it is, is not the law. Looks like fake news.

Here is the law.

2010 Georgia Code :: TITLE 17 - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE :: CHAPTER 4 - ARREST OF PERSONS :: ARTICLE 4 - ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS :: § 17-4-60 - Grounds for arrest

law.justia.com

A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

And here is an actual lawyer telling you that your understanding of the law is not accurate.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

Now. How is it you know more about the law than an experienced Defense Attorney in the State?

 

[Canon Shooter]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Reasonable suspicion is enough. For someone who lives in Georgia you certainly don't know the law, and apparently can't even read the thread since the law was already posted here.

By the way, fleeing itself can generate reasonable suspicion. Of course in this case, the suspicion turned out to be correct. It's also possible that they heard screams for the man to stop.

Well, if anyone needed further proof that you're a no-nothing dipshit, you just provided it here, dumbass.

I don't live in Georgia, and I've never claimed to.

I read from the Georgia Bar Association website:

"Citizen’s Arrests - As a private citizen, you have no authority to arrest anyone with a warrant. Without a warrant, you may arrest anyone who commits a misdemeanor or a felony in your presence or with your immediate knowledge. A citizen’s arrest occurs when a citizen prevents a suspect from leaving a scene. Citizen’s arrest most often happens in cases like shoplifting, when the store’s manager detains the suspected offender."

https://www.gabar.org/forthepublic/forteachersstudents/lre/teacherresources/upload/ch16.pdf

Arbery committed no crime in the presence of Travis McMichael, nor did Travis McMichael have immediate knowledge of any crime committed by Arbery. An example of "immediate knowledge" would be, say, a woman yelling to you that the guy running away from her carrying a woman's purse just stole her purse.

But, just for fun, let's pretend that Travis McMichael was in a position to legally perform a citizen's arrest of Arbery. The law in Georgia states: "When making a citizen’s arrest, a person may not use more force than is reasonable to make the arrest. Deadly force is limited to self-defense or to instances in which such force is necessary to prevent certain felonies."

Hopping out of the truck with a gun is clearly not the use of a minimum amount of force. In fact it's an unwarranted escalation of force for someone who's running down the road. So, as soon as his feet hit the ground he fucked up.

Now, even though you're too ignorant to wrap your head around this, we already know there's no legitimate claim to self-defense, simply because Travis and Gregory McMichael initiated the entire incident.

Lastly, deadly force is authorized to prevent someone from committing certain felonies, but not all. It's a felony to embezzle money from an employer. Deadly force is not authorized to stop it. Likewise, if Arbery had stolen something from a construction site days prior, that felony has not only already been committed, but it was committed outside the view or knowledge of Travis McMichael.

But none of those things are what happened.

I know you're not a fan of facts, but there ya' go...

I already posted the law it allows for arrest for only reasonable suspicion.

Stop spreading your fake news sources.

Fake news?? You don't like what it says so it's "fake news"?

You are slowly, but ever so surely, redefining the term "ignorant dipshit".

The source quoted in my post isn't a "fake news source", Zippy. It's the website for the Georgia State Bar Association.

You've just relegated yourself to "idiot clown" status. Nothing you say has value. Your opinions mean dick. You and your idiot ramblings are utterly meaningless...

Whatever it is, is not the law. Looks like fake news.

Here is the law.

2010 Georgia Code :: TITLE 17 - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE :: CHAPTER 4 - ARREST OF PERSONS :: ARTICLE 4 - ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS :: § 17-4-60 - Grounds for arrest

law.justia.com

A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

And you look like a complete fool.

I think we can agree that Arbery committed no crime in the presence of Travis McMichael, so we can dispense with that. As for ""immediate knowledge", no one reported the crime immediately following it being committed, nor was it reported to Travis McMichael by the property owner.

Travis McMichael had no legal standing to make a citizen's arrest. None. It didn't exist.

Your attempt to negate the point I was making actually reinforces it.

You're not very good at this, are you?

 

[Norman]

As was the opinion of several lawyers who say that the McMichaels did not have Reasonable Suspicion by Georgia Law.

LOL

Yeah. You guys are starting to sound like a skit from The Onion.



No matter how many people tell you the truth you just won’t accept it. Fine with me. You can claim they are political prisoners. But think about this. The longer you protest the more you sound like the far leftists you detest who refuse to accept truth. The Bernie Bro’s who act like Socialism works if the right people are in charge as one example.

Yes they did have reasonable grounds. Burglary is a felony, and they knew about the break ins and burglaries in the neighborhood, the camera footage with an individual who looks similar to the one running. When the black man didn't respond to their shouting, that severely did not help.

 

[Meathead]

As was the opinion of several lawyers who say that the McMichaels did not have Reasonable Suspicion by Georgia Law.

LOL

Yeah. You guys are starting to sound like a skit from The Onion.



No matter how many people tell you the truth you just won’t accept it. Fine with me. You can claim they are political prisoners. But think about this. The longer you protest the more you sound like the far leftists you detest who refuse to accept truth. The Bernie Bro’s who act like Socialism works if the right people are in charge as one example.

If I ever inject "the opinion of several lawyers" in any argument, then you can laugh too. Fair enough?

 

[Norman]

The owner of the property Mr. English said nothing was ever taken, he did not know the McMichaels and only met one of them once when he bought the property. At no time did English ever ask McMichaels to do anything on his behalf. This begs the question what business was it of the McMichaels? Absolutely none. Do people in Georgia always find it agreeable to stick their nose in another mans business? The McMichaels seem to think so.

Bing

www.bing.com

It’s not up to him, they have property of concern, they don’t want a pattern developed it’s really simple. Go to the south side of Chicago

It is up to him. It is his property. Only he can file a complaint for Trespassing. And his testimony at the trial is going to be really harmful for the defense.

Nonsense...again you prove you lack legal expertise despite all your tutoring from para-legals bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa As has been pointed out to you many times nothing that happened before the black guy assaulted the younger McMichaels has any relevancy....no matter what happened before....even if he had been followed, harassed, or falsely arrested (none of which happened) gave him (the insane negro) the right to committ assault...try and wrap your head around that if you want to stop looking so stupid.

Again. That is where you are wrong according to actual lawyers.

The Ahmaud Arbery Killing and Georgia Law

Explaining the legal issues surrounding the incident of two white men shooting a black jogger they suspected of a crime

arcdigital.media

The most important part of this statute is the unwritten bit — you are allowed to make arrests only with “reasonable force.” You can’t burn down an orphanage to catch one child snatching extra bowls of gruel. And the Georgia Supreme Court has held, as a matter of law, that you can’t chase someone down with a weapon because you think they have committed burglary. For example, it held that there was no evidence of a “citizen’s arrest” when a man with a baseball bat chased down someone who burglarized his home.

The McMichaels will have a hard time establishing that a crime was committed within their presence or immediate knowledge. But even if they get past those serious hurtles, they’re still stuck justifying hemming an unarmed man in with a truck and guns when those acts are each serious felonies under Georgia law.

Actual Lawyers seem to think you are wrong. But what do they know. I assume you have a BAR card and are licensed in Georgia. I honestly hope you are on the way to take over the defense of the McMichaels because they need all the legal help they can get. Because actual Georgia law applies to actual cases and decided by the actual Georgia Supreme Court says you are actually wrong.

They did not do anything unreasonable in making the arrest.

He only got shot because he grabbed a gun, this is reasonable self defense.

In the state of Georgia (and I believe this is true in all 50 states) if you initiate a confrontation, you cannot claim self defense. To wit: If I punch you in the face, and you then pick up a stick and hit me with it, I can't claim self defense if I shoot you and kill you.

It's mind boggling to know that there are idiots in this world who do not see someone arming himself, getting into a truck and chasing someone, and then getting out of that truck, with a loaded shotgun, as not initiating a confrontation...

Then how can you make a citizens arrest? To wit: I see a thug running out of my house ... then what happens?

That's not what happened here.

Focus.

Travis McMichael could not legally make a citizen's arrest because Arbery committed no crime in his presence, nor did McMichael have immediate, first hand knowledge of the crime. "First hand" means that Daddy McMichael telling Junior that Arbery committed a crime is insufficient to effect a citizen's arrest.

Had Daddy gotten his lard-ass out of the back of the truck, an argument might be able to be made that, since he allegedly saw the video, that he could make a citizen's arrest...

Reasonable suspicion is enough. For someone who lives in Georgia you certainly don't know the law, and apparently can't even read the thread since the law was already posted here.

By the way, fleeing itself can generate reasonable suspicion. Of course in this case, the suspicion turned out to be correct. It's also possible that they heard screams for the man to stop.

Well, if anyone needed further proof that you're a no-nothing dipshit, you just provided it here, dumbass.

I don't live in Georgia, and I've never claimed to.

I read from the Georgia Bar Association website:

"Citizen’s Arrests - As a private citizen, you have no authority to arrest anyone with a warrant. Without a warrant, you may arrest anyone who commits a misdemeanor or a felony in your presence or with your immediate knowledge. A citizen’s arrest occurs when a citizen prevents a suspect from leaving a scene. Citizen’s arrest most often happens in cases like shoplifting, when the store’s manager detains the suspected offender."

https://www.gabar.org/forthepublic/forteachersstudents/lre/teacherresources/upload/ch16.pdf

Arbery committed no crime in the presence of Travis McMichael, nor did Travis McMichael have immediate knowledge of any crime committed by Arbery. An example of "immediate knowledge" would be, say, a woman yelling to you that the guy running away from her carrying a woman's purse just stole her purse.

But, just for fun, let's pretend that Travis McMichael was in a position to legally perform a citizen's arrest of Arbery. The law in Georgia states: "When making a citizen’s arrest, a person may not use more force than is reasonable to make the arrest. Deadly force is limited to self-defense or to instances in which such force is necessary to prevent certain felonies."

Hopping out of the truck with a gun is clearly not the use of a minimum amount of force. In fact it's an unwarranted escalation of force for someone who's running down the road. So, as soon as his feet hit the ground he fucked up.

Now, even though you're too ignorant to wrap your head around this, we already know there's no legitimate claim to self-defense, simply because Travis and Gregory McMichael initiated the entire incident.

Lastly, deadly force is authorized to prevent someone from committing certain felonies, but not all. It's a felony to embezzle money from an employer. Deadly force is not authorized to stop it. Likewise, if Arbery had stolen something from a construction site days prior, that felony has not only already been committed, but it was committed outside the view or knowledge of Travis McMichael.

But none of those things are what happened.

I know you're not a fan of facts, but there ya' go...

I already posted the law it allows for arrest for only reasonable suspicion.

Stop spreading your fake news sources.

Fake news?? You don't like what it says so it's "fake news"?

You are slowly, but ever so surely, redefining the term "ignorant dipshit".

The source quoted in my post isn't a "fake news source", Zippy. It's the website for the Georgia State Bar Association.

You've just relegated yourself to "idiot clown" status. Nothing you say has value. Your opinions mean dick. You and your idiot ramblings are utterly meaningless...

Whatever it is, is not the law. Looks like fake news.

Here is the law.

2010 Georgia Code :: TITLE 17 - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE :: CHAPTER 4 - ARREST OF PERSONS :: ARTICLE 4 - ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS :: § 17-4-60 - Grounds for arrest

law.justia.com

A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

And you look like a complete fool.

I think we can agree that Arbery committed no crime in the presence of Travis McMichael, so we can dispense with that. As for ""immediate knowledge", no one reported the crime immediately following it being committed, nor was it reported to Travis McMichael by the property owner.

Travis McMichael had no legal standing to make a citizen's arrest. None. It didn't exist.

Your attempt to negate the point I was making actually reinforces it.

You're not very good at this, are you?

Are you unable to read clear cut text? Stopping someone from fleeing only requires REASONABLE SUSPICION, which they had in spades.