Open Season: "Vigilantes" Shoot Black Jogger in Georgia

[Estanglia]

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.

If it looked like the shotgunner was gonna shoot anyway, trying to knock the gun away might be a smarter idea than just standing there/running, since it's probably easier to knock a gun out of someone's hand than dodge/flee a shotgun shot (depending on how close you are to them/cover).

[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.

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

You can charge 1 gun, you're not going to live charging 2 guns.

If it looked like the shotgunner was gonna shoot anyway, trying to knock the gun away might be a smarter idea than just standing there/running, since it's probably easier to knock a gun out of someone's hand than dodge/flee a shotgun shot (depending on how close you are to them/cover).

And then while you're dodging the shotgun the second guy shoots you with their gun.

[Nazeroth]

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

You can charge 1 gun, you're not going to live charging 2 guns.

People do things in desperation

[Fartsniffage]

"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?

That's not how it works. Fight or flight would lead to you generally running from a gun. You should not run from a person with a projectile weapon.

[Nazeroth]

Do you understand fight or flight?

That's not how it works. Fight or flight would lead to you generally running from a gun. You should not run from a person with a projectile weapon.

Wrong

Fight or flight is just that

People snap and make a move, sometimes it gets them killed

[Fartsniffage]

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

You can charge 1 gun, you're not going to live charging 2 guns.

You're also not going to live running from 2 guns if they want to shoot you.

Hence the bit about believing they'll kill you whatever.

[Estanglia]

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

You can charge 1 gun, you're not going to live charging 2 guns.

If it looked like the shotgunner was gonna shoot anyway, trying to knock the gun away might be a smarter idea than just standing there/running, since it's probably easier to knock a gun out of someone's hand than dodge/flee a shotgun shot (depending on how close you are to them/cover).

And then while you're dodging the shotgun the second guy shoots you with their gun.

The other option is running, which means you get shot at by two people.

[Greed and Death]

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.

Correct.
Very often people break the law but prosecutors can't prove it or can't convince a jury. I think that is the case here.
Don't get me wrong if I were criminal defense would love this case. Criminal Defense attorneys often get paid very little, judging from the neighborhood I suspect once all is said and done these two defendants could bring 600,000 to pay legal fees. That's a PI to investigate every prospective juror, that's money to do focus groups to figure out which jurors are more likely to acquit. Things you wouldn't think of like what degree the person has, or which school they went to.

[Cannot think of a name]

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

You can charge 1 gun, you're not going to live charging 2 guns.

Well, look when Sniffage said it I was a little skeptical about it but gave him the benefit of the doubt because I'm sure at some point in his former military training the subject might have come up once or twice.

Then if you look at what he's saying, it makes sense. You can't outrun a bullet. But if you can get within their arms reach now it's much more difficult for them to bring the gun to bear and for you to try and control their gun arm. If you run you're just a target hoping they're a stormtrooper.

Even with two of them, because knucklefucker #2 in that pick up will join in shooting at you if you flee but if you're right next to his buddy he might second guess taking that shot because even if he hits you he might still hit his companion as well.

When it comes down to it, heading straight towards that person in this situation is exactly what you should do to increase your odds. As we know, it's not always going to work but it will work more often than giving a guy with a fucking shotgun a free shot at your fleeing back.

[Fartsniffage]

You can charge 1 gun, you're not going to live charging 2 guns.

Well, look when Sniffage said it I was a little skeptical about it but gave him the benefit of the doubt because I'm sure at some point in his former military training the subject might have come up once or twice.

Then if you look at what he's saying, it makes sense. You can't outrun a bullet. But if you can get within their arms reach now it's much more difficult for them to bring the gun to bear and for you to try and control their gun arm. If you run you're just a target hoping they're a stormtrooper.

Even with two of them, because knucklefucker #2 in that pick up will join in shooting at you if you flee but if you're right next to his buddy he might second guess taking that shot because even if he hits you he might still hit his companion as well.

When it comes down to it, heading straight towards that person in this situation is exactly what you should do to increase your odds. As we know, it's not always going to work but it will work more often than giving a guy with a fucking shotgun a free shot at your fleeing back.

Basically this. Also, charging a guy with a gun is not what they expect so it give you an advantage even to a tiny degree. If you expect to die anyway then tiny advantages are worth it.

[Gravlen]

Its a fairly common citizens arrest statute.

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?

Two months after is far too late.There has to be more immediacy.

The term "within his immediate knowledge" enables a private citizen to use any of his senses to obtain knowledge that an offense is being committed. A private citizen is not required to actually be present when a misdemeanor offense occurs.

Merneigh v. State
My underlining.

See also State v. Folk, which the above-mentioned case refers to:

A warrantless arrest is lawful if the underlying offense was committed within the "immediate knowledge" of the arresting officer. OCGA § 17-4-20 (a). And the officer is not required to see the crime taking place, but may use any of his senses to acquire knowledge that an offense is being committed. Youhoing v. State, 226 Ga. App. 475, 476-477(1) ( 487 S.E.2d 86) (1997).

Odor as well as sight, hearing, taste or touch can be used in establishing probable cause. If the presence of odors is testified to before a magistrate and he finds the affiant qualified to know the odor, and it is one sufficiently distinctive to identify a forbidden substance, this Court has never held such a basis insufficient to justify issuance of a search warrant. Indeed it might very well be found to be evidence of most persuasive character.

State v. Folk

Regardless, it doesn't matter, since McMichael isn't claiming to have attempted to carry out a citizens arrest. He wasn't arresting Arbery, merely wanting to interrogate him. A conversation is not an arrest.

So we're left with a possible attempt at illegal imprisonment, and possibly violating Georgia law by pointing a gun at Arbery without legal justification, both of which would enable Arbery to engage in self-defence.

However, this is also irrelevant if McMichael simply fired first as Arbery was jogging past, as the video appears to show. That would be murder.

[Des-Bal]

Two months after is far too late.There has to be more immediacy.

The term "within his immediate knowledge" enables a private citizen to use any of his senses to obtain knowledge that an offense is being committed. A private citizen is not required to actually be present when a misdemeanor offense occurs.

Merneigh v. State
My underlining.

See also State v. Folk, which the above-mentioned case refers to:

A warrantless arrest is lawful if the underlying offense was committed within the "immediate knowledge" of the arresting officer. OCGA § 17-4-20 (a). And the officer is not required to see the crime taking place, but may use any of his senses to acquire knowledge that an offense is being committed. Youhoing v. State, 226 Ga. App. 475, 476-477(1) ( 487 S.E.2d 86) (1997).

Odor as well as sight, hearing, taste or touch can be used in establishing probable cause. If the presence of odors is testified to before a magistrate and he finds the affiant qualified to know the odor, and it is one sufficiently distinctive to identify a forbidden substance, this Court has never held such a basis insufficient to justify issuance of a search warrant. Indeed it might very well be found to be evidence of most persuasive character.

State v. Folk

Regardless, it doesn't matter, since McMichael isn't claiming to have attempted to carry out a citizens arrest. He wasn't arresting Arbery, merely wanting to interrogate him. A conversation is not an arrest.

So we're left with a possible attempt at illegal imprisonment, and possibly violating Georgia law by pointing a gun at Arbery without legal justification, both of which would enable Arbery to engage in self-defence.

However, this is also irrelevant if McMichael simply fired first as Arbery was jogging past, as the video appears to show. That would be murder.

First of all thank you for demonstrating the correct way to use sources. The way you provided a link, noted the relevant portion, and explained how it furthered your point makes it easy to respond to you and makes it clear you aren't just raving.

To your sources the statute requires immediacy when the crime isn't a felony. Merneigh speaks to immediate knowledge not requiring a felony but cannot be read to require immediacy otherwise.

Please link the video showing him firing first. Several people have said he shots first, if that's true I'll turn on a dime because you 100% cant do that but the video I've watched and linked repeatedly shows no hallmarks of editing or editorializing and shows the first shot being fired while the victims hands are already on the gun.

[Cannot think of a name]

It only took two months and the leaked video causing national outrage, but finally...

Two men involved in the fatal shooting of Ahmaud Arbery near Brunswick, Georgia, have been arrested and face murder and aggravated assault charges, according to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation.
Gregory McMichael and his son, Travis McMichael, were taken into custody and will be booked into the Glynn County Jail, the GBI said Thursday evening.
Arbery, 25, was jogging in a neighborhood outside Brunswick on February 23 when Gregory McMichael, a former police officer, and his son chased him down, authorities said.
According to a Glynn County Police report, Gregory McMichael, 64, later told officers that he thought Arbery looked like a person suspected in a series of recent break-ins in the area.

After they chased down Arbery, McMichael told police, Arbery and Travis McMichael, 34, struggled over his son's shotgun. The elder McMichael told police that his son shot Arbery after the latter attacked him, according to the police report.
Gregory McMichael said two shots were fired before Arbery fell to the street, the report said. In a video of the incident, three shots can be heard before Arbery is seen stumbling and falling to the ground.

Arbery family attorney S. Lee Merritt says that the McMichaels, who are white, saw a black man jogging through their neighborhood, assumed the worst and tracked him down and killed him.

[Des-Bal]

Its Zimmerman all over again, let's pump the racial angle to try an open and shut case and then get upset when it goes the only way it can.

[Cannot think of a name]

Its Zimmerman all over again, let's pump the racial angle to try an open and shut case and then get upset when it goes the only way it can.

Literally only you think that and all you can use to support that is the world's shittiest interpretation of a law that you can't find any precedent for.

So...yeah. They straight up murdered Ahmaud Arbery. Sorry dude. You have failed to make your case and all you're doing at this point is pounding the sand and crying about it.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Its Zimmerman all over again,

A case of racial profiling and unjustified murder?

I completely agree.

[Des-Bal]

Literally only you think that and all you can use to support that is the world's shittiest interpretation of a law that you can't find any precedent for.

So...yeah. They straight up murdered Ahmaud Arbery. Sorry dude. You have failed to make your case and all you're doing at this point is pounding the sand and crying about it.

Whose crying? The law is clear and theres not a serious argument to be made that they were acting outside the bounds of the law. It's exactly what happened with Zimmerman, a bunch of whining, a bunch of race baiting, a bunch of out and out lying about the facts but when it gets down to the law it's actually quite clear cut.

[Des-Bal]

I completely agree.

A verdict of not guilty, meaning you and he are equally guilty of the murder of Trayvon Martin.

[Cannot think of a name]

Literally only you think that and all you can use to support that is the world's shittiest interpretation of a law that you can't find any precedent for.

So...yeah. They straight up murdered Ahmaud Arbery. Sorry dude. You have failed to make your case and all you're doing at this point is pounding the sand and crying about it.

Whose crying? The law is clear and theres not a serious argument to be made that they were acting outside the bounds of the law. It's exactly what happened with Zimmerman, a bunch of whining, a bunch of race baiting, a bunch of out and out lying about the facts but when it gets down to the law it's actually quite clear cut.

Yes it is. These two men stalked and murdered Ahmaud Arbery. It is pretty clear cut. It's just weird that you can't see that.

[Gormwood]

I completely agree.

A verdict of not guilty, meaning you and he are equally guilty of the murder of Trayvon Martin.

Pffft. You though Trayvon Martin Had It Coming too.

[Des-Bal]

Yes it is. These two men stalked and murdered Ahmaud Arbery. It is pretty clear cut. It's just weird that you can't see that.

Are you familiar with the statutory requirements in stalking in the state of georgia?

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

I completely agree.

A verdict of not guilty, meaning you and he are equally guilty of the murder of Trayvon Martin.

I'm guilty of murdering a man I've never met and had no connection to at any point in my life whatsoever?

Sure, pal. Keep living in Dreamland.

[Des-Bal]

Pffft. You though Trayvon Martin Had It Coming too.

No more than the court did.

[Des-Bal]

I'm guilty of murdering a man I've never met and had no connection to at any point in my life whatsoever?

L

It's not that you're guilty it's that you're as guilty as Zimmerman. Neither of you were found guilty for his murder.

[Cannot think of a name]

Yes it is. These two men stalked and murdered Ahmaud Arbery. It is pretty clear cut. It's just weird that you can't see that.

Are you familiar with the statutory requirements in stalking in the state of georgia?

Give it a rest, dude. Come back when you've found one thing that agrees with your mind bogglingly ridiculous interpretations of the laws involved before you start prancing around with this kind of nonsense.