Open Season: "Vigilantes" Shoot Black Jogger in Georgia

[Des-Bal]

Its a fairly common citizens arrest statute.

Stupidity is unfortunately common.

[Spirit of Hope]

The statue says if it is a felony you can arrest them if they are fleeing and you have reasonable suspicion they committed the felony. Is your argument that by running past a house two months later, the victim is fleeing a felony? Do you have any proof that Gerogia has ever accepted that argument?

The Statute says that the crime must be a felony not that the flight must be from a felony. You're trying to add additional requirements to the statute. The ommission of a word or phrase must be read as intentional. If there is any requirement that you must be fleeing from a felony or from any crime for that matter then it can only exist because of case law, the burden is on you.

I have linked to articles that support my point, you have failed to do so. Again, please provide any proof that citizens arrest of allowed months later. I don't even need case law, an opinion piece would be fine.

[Des-Bal]

That one can consider someone to be 'fleeing a crime' two months after it happened seems poorly thought out. At what point is someone allowed to move quickly after a crime if they happen to share a similarity with the suspect?

The statute does not say fleeing a crime or moving quickly.

[Albrenia]

That one can consider someone to be 'fleeing a crime' two months after it happened seems poorly thought out. At what point is someone allowed to move quickly after a crime if they happen to share a similarity with the suspect?

The statute does not say fleeing a crime or moving quickly.

So just anyone can citizen's arrest anyone else if they personally have a hunch that the person maybe might be involved in a felony at any point in the past?

That seems extremely open to abuse.

[Des-Bal]

I have linked to articles that support my point, you have failed to do so. Again, please provide any proof that citizens arrest of allowed months later. I don't even need case law, an opinion piece would be fine.

If you linked to the wikipedia's article on nose picking it would be equally relevant. You posted two random links and said nothing indicating an understanding of what they said or how they could further a poin controversy. I am not going to see who can make more words blue. The law doesnt say what you want it to so provide me evidence the law has elements that are not spelled out in the statute. It has to be case law.

[Des-Bal]

So just anyone can citizen's arrest anyone else if they personally have a hunch that the person maybe might be involved in a felony at any point in the past?

That seems extremely open to abuse.

No and no one has argued that.

[Fartsniffage]

The statute does not say fleeing a crime or moving quickly.

So just anyone can citizen's arrest anyone else if they personally have a hunch that the person maybe might be involved in a felony at any point in the past?

That seems extremely open to abuse.

The guy is spouting bollocks. These guys will do prison time for what they did.

[Sodoran Alesia]

That one can consider someone to be 'fleeing a crime' two months after it happened seems poorly thought out. At what point is someone allowed to move quickly after a crime if they happen to share a similarity with the suspect?

The statute does not say fleeing a crime or moving quickly.

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.

So Arbery was attempting to escape because of a crime he allegedly committed 2 months ago (no evidence he's committed it either)? I don't know, if random armed strangers were chasing me in a truck I'd run too

[Risottia]

I did? I did pretty quickly actually: So fucking what.

Did you read what happened in that burglary? From The Brunswick News

Only one burglary, an automobile burglary, was reported to county police in the Satilla Shores neighborhood between Jan. 1 and Feb. 23, according to documents obtained by The News in a public records request to the Glynn County Police Department. It involved a Smith & Wesson M&P 9 mm pistol stolen Jan. 1 from a pickup truck outside 230 Satilla Drive, the home of Travis McMichael, according to the police report.

Gregory McMichael moved the 2011 Ford F-150 from one spot to another in front of the home at around 9:30 a.m. Jan. 1, forgetting to lock it afterward, Travis McMichael told police. About an hour later, Travis McMichael found the handgun’s empty holster on the unlocked truck’s seat, the report said.

They weren't even there for the burglary, they didn't witness the burglar. What evidence is there that Arbery committed it? Now, the article says a caller allegedly said Arbery was seen on surveillance but then why wasn't it reported to the authorities? Reminder, the incident happened in February yet it has been shown no string of burglaries ever happened, the only police report is the one I quoted above. Where are all the reports of attempted burglaries? It's rather telling there's only one

By the way, that isn't "a burglary happened". That's a "someone claimed he forgot to lock the car door while his gun was placed on the seat in its holster, and claims that the only way he could have lost his gun, but not the holster, is that the gun was stolen from that car in that moment by someone who didn't really like the holster that came free with it".

[Albrenia]

So just anyone can citizen's arrest anyone else if they personally have a hunch that the person maybe might be involved in a felony at any point in the past?

That seems extremely open to abuse.

No and no one has argued that.

Besides a personal hunch that the guy robbed a truck two months ago, what reason did they have for detaining him, then?

Keeping in mind that, to my knowledge, they did not know about the call of him allegedly looking in windows.

[ArenaC]

I'm all for strong self defense laws, but I do agree there needs to be some revisions.

I still can't believe that two cocksuckers saw a guy running down the street, hopped in their truck, cornered him, shot him, and they ain't already doing life.

Death*

[Des-Bal]

The guy is spouting bollocks. These guys will do prison time for what they did.

Yeah just like Zimmerman. How mad you are has no bearing on how illegal conduct is.

So Arbery was attempting to escape because of a crime he allegedly committed 2 months ago (no evidence he's committed it either)? I don't know, if random armed strangers were chasing me in a truck I'd run too

If Arbrey is brought up on charges it will be an injustice.

[Greed and Death]

Defense attorney mode: The shooting occurred two months ago. Coincidence the burglaries stopped ?

Would this then be the part where the judge admonishes you publicly for not following your own case and make such a silly mistake as to not be able to suss out what two month period we were talking about? And then your client starts angry whispering at you because they're starting to lose faith in you and are pretty sure your lack of attention is going to get them thrown in jail?

Because it sounds like that's when that would happen.

If the prosecutor isn't clear on which 2 months he is talking about that can and will be used against him in closing argument. Maybe the prosecutor can object and get that stricken from the record but that also means because you objected to it you have called attention to that statement and now every juror remembers that statement. Now you can also rebut because the prosecutor gets to speak last during criminal trials but that means you will be doing that off cuff and if you misquote me in the slightest I will object just to highlight the statement again to the jury and make it look like you are trying to misquote me. By the way something similar happened in the Zimmerman trial.

[The South Falls]

No and no one has argued that.

Besides a personal hunch that the guy robbed a truck two months ago, what reason did they have for detaining him, then?

Keeping in mind that, to my knowledge, they did not know about the call of him allegedly looking in windows.

A reasonable citizen's arrest statute needs a reasonable cause. Based on the information they had, they did not possess the grounds to attempt to arrest this man.

[Cannot think of a name]

Would this then be the part where the judge admonishes you publicly for not following your own case and make such a silly mistake as to not be able to suss out what two month period we were talking about? And then your client starts angry whispering at you because they're starting to lose faith in you and are pretty sure your lack of attention is going to get them thrown in jail?

Because it sounds like that's when that would happen.

If the prosecutor isn't clear on which 2 months he is talking about that can and will be used against him in closing argument. Maybe the prosecutor can object and get that stricken from the record but that also means because you objected to it you have called attention to that statement and now every juror remembers that statement. Now you can also rebut because the prosecutor gets to speak last during criminal trials but that means you will be doing that off cuff and if you misquote me in the slightest I will object just to highlight the statement again to the jury and make it look like you are trying to misquote me. By the way something similar happened in the Zimmerman trial.

But this is a forum so we're just going to tell you that being obtuse is not as cute as you want it to be.

[Fartsniffage]

Would this then be the part where the judge admonishes you publicly for not following your own case and make such a silly mistake as to not be able to suss out what two month period we were talking about? And then your client starts angry whispering at you because they're starting to lose faith in you and are pretty sure your lack of attention is going to get them thrown in jail?

Because it sounds like that's when that would happen.

If the prosecutor isn't clear on which 2 months he is talking about that can and will be used against him in closing argument. Maybe the prosecutor can object and get that stricken from the record but that also means because you objected to it you have called attention to that statement and now every juror remembers that statement. Now you can also rebut because the prosecutor gets to speak last during criminal trials but that means you will be doing that off cuff and if you misquote me in the slightest I will object just to highlight the statement again to the jury and make it look like you are trying to misquote me. By the way something similar happened in the Zimmerman trial.

This isn't a trial. It's an NSG thread. Chill the fuck out.

[Risottia]

If the prosecutor isn't clear on which 2 months he is talking about that can and will be used against him in closing argument. Maybe the prosecutor can object and get that stricken from the record but that also means because you objected to it you have called attention to that statement and now every juror remembers that statement. Now you can also rebut because the prosecutor gets to speak last during criminal trials but that means you will be doing that off cuff and if you misquote me in the slightest I will object just to highlight the statement again to the jury and make it look like you are trying to misquote me. By the way something similar happened in the Zimmerman trial.

But this is a forum so we're just going to tell you that being obtuse is not as cute as you want it to be.

I suspect that G&D is actually trying to explain how those two are most likely NOT going to be found guilty and all the tactics their defence can and will use. Doesn't look like he's taking their side.
Just giving my two cents here.

[Nazeroth]

If the prosecutor isn't clear on which 2 months he is talking about that can and will be used against him in closing argument. Maybe the prosecutor can object and get that stricken from the record but that also means because you objected to it you have called attention to that statement and now every juror remembers that statement. Now you can also rebut because the prosecutor gets to speak last during criminal trials but that means you will be doing that off cuff and if you misquote me in the slightest I will object just to highlight the statement again to the jury and make it look like you are trying to misquote me. By the way something similar happened in the Zimmerman trial.

This isn't a trial. It's an NSG thread. Chill the fuck out.

You are in the court of the people’s commissariat of opinions comrade

[Greed and Death]

Besides a personal hunch that the guy robbed a truck two months ago, what reason did they have for detaining him, then?

Keeping in mind that, to my knowledge, they did not know about the call of him allegedly looking in windows.

A reasonable citizen's arrest statute needs a reasonable cause. Based on the information they had, they did not possess the grounds to attempt to arrest this man.

Matched Description from suspect 2 months ago.

My guess is a white guy was burglar 2 months ago and Ahmaud just happened be running though the neighborhood two months ago.

[The Lone Alliance]

The biggest thing that gets me is the claim that the man swung at them, if someone gets out of a truck with a fucking shotgun, there is no way in hell you're throwing a punch at the person said shotgunner is backing up.

I don't believe anyone is that suicidal so that's the least believable part of it.

[Nazeroth]

The biggest thing that gets me is the claim that the man swung at them, if someone gets out of a truck with a fucking shotgun, there is no way in hell you're throwing a punch at the person said shotgunner is backing up.

I don't believe anyone is that suicidal so that's the least believable part of it.

I wont judge any act of violence in defense

Some people choose to swing, not tactically smart but at least understandable.

[Fartsniffage]

The biggest thing that gets me is the claim that the man swung at them, if someone gets out of a truck with a fucking shotgun, there is no way in hell you're throwing a punch at the person said shotgunner is backing up.

I don't believe anyone is that suicidal so that's the least believable part of it.

Charge a gun, run from a knife. Basic self defence if you believe you life is in danger.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

The biggest thing that gets me is the claim that the man swung at them, if someone gets out of a truck with a fucking shotgun, there is no way in hell you're throwing a punch at the person said shotgunner is backing up.

I don't believe anyone is that suicidal so that's the least believable part of it.

Charge a gun, run from a knife. Basic self defence if you believe you life is in danger.

"Charge a gun"
Yes and then I'd get shot.
Hide behind something if you're unarmed.
But this is America.
Is this advice for convicted felons?

[Estanglia]

This situation is all kinds of fucked up.

What mind do you have to have to see someone who apparently looked like someone wanted for break-ins (and that seems like it) and think that "drive up to them in our truck whilst armed and attempt to apprehend them" is a smart course of action?

What if you get the right guy and he's armed too? What if you got an innocent man who had zero fucking clue why you tried stopping them and (quite rightfully) thinks that the armed people who randomly stopped him were intending to do something bad to him?

[Nazeroth]

Charge a gun, run from a knife. Basic self defence if you believe you life is in danger.

"Charge a gun"
Yes and then I'd get shot.
Hide behind something if you're unarmed.
But this is America.
Is this advice for convicted felons?

Do you understand fight or flight?