Jogging in Georgia while black.

[Skeptic Tank]

Prior to this, there was no lynching here.

Charges brought based on public outrage are inherently illegitimate.

 

[Roboramma]

Gotta admit, this is entertaining as hell. A veritable army of scarerows ITT.

No one on the thread is saying this is Arbery's fault. Is that in dispute?

No one is saying that he should have surrendered to a citizens arrest. Got that, kids?

No one is saying that the hillbilly bigots had any legal , moral, ethical, etc justification for their actions. Clear enough?

Both bob and bogative have expressed those viewpoints, so no, it's not clear, it's wrong.

The only peripheral issue is, as Suburban Turkey and MeadMaker point out, a tactical one. Arbery took a run at a truck full of armed crazy rednecks. That will get a brother killed right pronto, I hear.

That seems pretty off topic to me. Did he make the right tactical decision? Not clear, but not really meaningful. The guys in the pickup should still go to prison either way.

I don't really see the point of discussing the tactics of his situation in this thread.

 

[PhantomWolf]

While IANAL and it'd be good if people actually looked at the law before guessing....

Except maybe in Georgia.

Georgia Code Title 17. Criminal Procedure § 17-4-61

(c) A peace officer who in good faith and within the scope of his authority takes custody of a person arrested by a private person pursuant to this Code section shall not be liable at law for false arrest or false imprisonment arising out of the arrest.

No, only peace officers get immunity for false imprisonment, and only if they have a good faith basis for the arrest.

Barring new evidence that changes things radically, I don't see how this is less than second degree murder for the shooter, with felony murder (if that is a thing in Georgia) charges for all participants, or assault charges at the least.

He still could be guilty of felony murder as an accomplice in a crime. It's no nearly as clear cut, though.

There is no separation of Murder into 1st and 2nd degree in Georgia (they do have a Murder in the 2nd degree, but it's connected exclusively to cruelty to children in the second degree), they have Homicide where Murder is considered the most serve type.

so does it meet the legal definition of murder?

Georgia Code Title 16. Crimes and Offenses § 16-5-1

(c) A person commits the offense of murder when, in the commission of a felony, he or she causes the death of another human being irrespective of malice.

So where they doing committing a felony?

If we go back to my previous post then....

Georgia Code Title 16. Crimes and Offenses § 16-5-1

(a) A person commits the offense of false imprisonment when, in violation of the personal liberty of another, he arrests, confines, or detains such person without legal authority.

Is this a felony?

Georgia Code Title 16. Crimes and Offenses § 16-1-3

(5) “Felony” means a crime punishable by death, by imprisonment for life, or by imprisonment for more than 12 months.

we go back to § 16-5-1

(b) A person convicted of the offense of false imprisonment shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years.

So does that meet the qualifications of a Felony? Yes, and thus the person that pulled the trigger was committing a Felony at the time of the death, but does that make the death a murder.

That far more complicated. Firstly there can be a lot of debate about if they were actually committing a false imprisonment. Here are the main defenses...

Lack of Intent - well we know they had intent.
A valid arrest was made - They would argue this one, but as we noted previously, it was not valid under the law.
There was a reasonable way out - Note that the way out must be reasonable. They could argue, as some had done, that he could have run, but since they were chasing him, running would be unlikely to lead to escape.
Consent - there is no indication that the victim here consented
It was lawful imprisonment - Doesn't apply in this case
The victim did not know they were being detained - This is a possible defense, however from the victim's actions I would say that he knew they were attempting to detain him.
Threats of reputational harm are insufficient - This is NA, they had guns pointed at him, it wasn't his reputation that was at harm here.
The victim was not confined - Again, not really applicable as this is more for people that are prevented from going into a certain area, but can go elsewhere freely.

So on that basis it would seem that the defenses don't apply, and it was False Imprisonment. As such it is likely that by the written Law it was murder.... However, and there is a however, again it's not totally clear, as we'll cover below.

So what about Felony Murder for the others?

Under Georgia Code Title 16. Crimes and Offenses § 16-2-20

(a) Every person concerned in the commission of a crime is a party thereto and may be charged with and convicted of commission of the crime.

(b) A person is concerned in the commission of a crime only if he:

(1) Directly commits the crime;

(2) Intentionally causes some other person to commit the crime under such circumstances that the other person is not guilty of any crime either in fact or because of legal incapacity;

(3) Intentionally aids or abets in the commission of the crime; or

(4) Intentionally advises, encourages, hires, counsels, or procures another to commit the crime.

So the basic read is that yes they could be considered to be concerned to the crime, however.... in Georgia "Felony Murder" is only applied to cases where the felony is considered to be "inherently dangerous" and to date these crimes are burglary, arson, rape, kidnapping, aggravated assault, cruelty to children, possession of a weapon on school property, and robbery.

Could the court expand that list to include False Imprisonment? I'd suggest that it certainly could, but as of yet it hasn't been..... so.....

And this is the grey area as to what could be charged, and sine IANAL I'm not even going to try and argue this one out. I'd say that there certainly is a case to be made for them to be charged, but there is also a case for not charging beyond the shooter. (ETA: I see above that the shooter and it seems one other have now been charged, so Woohoo!)

ETA2: I see that they have been charged with aggravated assault as well as murder, and a death during an aggravated assault is already on the list for Felony Murders, so there is no need to speculate on is False Imprisonment rises to the level of an inherently dangerous felony.

That person needs to be charged with obstruction of justice.

Georgia Code Title 16. Crimes and Offenses § 16-10-24

(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this Code section, a person who knowingly and willfully obstructs or hinders any law enforcement officer, prison guard, jailer, correctional officer, community supervision officer, county or Department of Juvenile Justice juvenile probation officer, probation officer serving pursuant to Article 6 of Chapter 8 of Title 42, or game warden in the lawful discharge of his or her official duties shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

(b) Whoever knowingly and willfully resists, obstructs, or opposes any law enforcement officer, prison guard, jailer, correctional officer, community supervision officer, county or Department of Juvenile Justice juvenile probation officer, probation officer serving pursuant to Article 6 of Chapter 8 of Title 42, or game warden in the lawful discharge of his or her official duties by offering or doing violence to the person of such officer or legally authorized person shall be guilty of a felony and shall, upon a first conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than five years.  Upon a second conviction for a violation of this subsection, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years nor more than ten years.  Upon a third or subsequent conviction for a violation of this subsection, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years nor more than 15 years.

(c) Whoever knowingly and willfully resists, obstructs, or opposes any law enforcement officer, prison guard, jailer, correctional officer, community supervision officer, county or Department of Juvenile Justice juvenile probation officer, probation officer serving pursuant to Article 6 of Chapter 8 of Title 42, or game warden in the lawful discharge of his or her official duties by knowingly and willfully throwing, projecting, or expelling human or animal blood, urine, feces, vomitus, or seminal fluid on or at such individual shall be guilty of a felony and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than five years.

(d) A person convicted under this Code section shall be punished, in addition to any term of imprisonment imposed, by a fine as provided by law which shall be at least $300.00.  With respect to $300.00 of the fine imposed, after distributing the surcharges and deductions required by Chapter 21 of Title 15, Code Sections 36-15-9 and 42-8-34 , and Title 47, it shall be earmarked for the Georgia State Indemnification Fund for purposes of payment of indemnification for death or disability as provided for in Part 1 of Article 5 of Chapter 9 of Title 45.

So no, just no.

 

[bruto]

Can't tell if serious...

If you would rather not dig into the "body of work" it's easier just to say yes, it's serious.

 

[Roboramma]

Being chased with a gun and no shooting? That's a robbery in progress.

In this case it wasn't, so it looks like his interpretation of what was going on is actually closer to reality than yours. Given that, it seems odd to fault him for not having your faulty interpretation of the situation.

 

[Roboramma]

Robbery, sure. I'm inclined to think that a truck chasing me, cutting me off, then an armed person jumping out of the truck at me is not just interested in taking my wallet.

I was in India the day after the US went into Iraq. I was walking down the street when a rickshaw pulled up and four guys jumped out and surrounded me, screaming at me. The idea that they were trying to rob me didn't even cross my mind.

(Luckily an Indian woman I knew was just down the street, she saw what was happening and ran over and yelled at them and they left me alone.)

 

[bruto]

Both bob and bogative have expressed those viewpoints, so no, it's not clear, it's wrong.

That seems pretty off topic to me. Did he make the right tactical decision? Not clear, but not really meaningful. The guys in the pickup should still go to prison either way.

I don't really see the point of discussing the tactics of his situation in this thread.

I think you can add Skeptic Tank to your list.

Alas, I'm inclined to agree with Joe Morgue on this: while we can fuss about with possible scenarios about what Arbery might have done or should have done, I think the killers meant to shoot him, and whatever he might have done, they would have found an excuse to do it. The discussion we're now having would be almost the same, just a different thing he should or shouldn't have done.

 

[William Parcher]

In this case it wasn't, so it looks like his interpretation of what was going on is actually closer to reality than yours. Given that, it seems odd to fault him for not having your faulty interpretation of the situation.

What did the victim say when he was asked what he felt was going on?

 

[William Parcher]

I was in India the day after the US went into Iraq. I was walking down the street when a rickshaw pulled up and four guys jumped out and surrounded me, screaming at me. The idea that they were trying to rob me didn't even cross my mind.

Which one of the four was pointing the gun at you while screaming?

 

[pgwenthold]

So no, just no.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this Code section, a person who knowingly and willfully obstructs or hinders any law enforcement officer, prison guard, jailer, correctional officer, community supervision officer, county or Department of Juvenile Justice juvenile probation officer, probation officer serving pursuant to Article 6 of Chapter 8 of Title 42, or game warden in the lawful discharge of his or her official duties shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

An investigator lying about the material facts of a case is willfully hindering a law enforcement officer from being able to make an arrest on a guilty party, so yes, just yes.

 

[Mike!]

I think you can add Skeptic Tank to your list.

Alas, I'm inclined to agree with Joe Morgue on this: while we can fuss about with possible scenarios about what Arbery might have done or should have done, I think the killers meant to shoot him, and whatever he might have done, they would have found an excuse to do it. The discussion we're now having would be almost the same, just a different thing he should or shouldn't have done.

I wish this wasn't the case, but I'm inclined to agree with you on their, or at least the shooters, intent. All one need do is watch HIM right after the fatal shot. They aren't the actions of a person who is shocked or surprised by what has happened. He watches Arbery run and fall, then walks away like it was nothing. Even the guy in the back of the truck acts surprised by what's happened. His frantic scramble compared to the other is telling. Glad they've locked them up.

 

[whoanellie]

audio of two 911 calls
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...called-911-report-black-male-running-shooting

 

[Skeptic Tank]

I think you can add Skeptic Tank to your list.

Alas, I'm inclined to agree with Joe Morgue on this: while we can fuss about with possible scenarios about what Arbery might have done or should have done, I think the killers meant to shoot him, and whatever he might have done, they would have found an excuse to do it. The discussion we're now having would be almost the same, just a different thing he should or shouldn't have done.

In all seriousness, I think the chances of this are very close to zero.

I wish this wasn't the case, but I'm inclined to agree with you on their, or at least the shooters, intent. All one need do is watch HIM right after the fatal shot. They aren't the actions of a person who is shocked or surprised by what has happened. He watches Arbery run and fall, then walks away like it was nothing. Even the guy in the back of the truck acts surprised by what's happened. His frantic scramble compared to the other is telling. Glad they've locked them up.

It's really hard to say that kind of thing about someone in a moment like that, could have been in shock, etc. People sometimes look stunned or like their reaction is surprisingly mundane in moments like that. Just hard to say.

I honestly think they probably thought the odds they'd end up shooting the guy were pretty much zilch. I think, in fact, if they'd thought it was even a remote possibility they'd have sat it out and waited on the cops.

I think they were 100% convinced he would stop at the sight of them and their firearms and hang tight until police arrived to question him.

People are often shocked by the instantaneous, unthinking, impulsive violence of certain types.

The people who are overly sympathetic toward criminals often fail to realize, some people are just violent and are constitutionally incapable of making a sober, restrained "fight another day" or "well crap, they caught me" type of determination. They're thwarted in any way, and they lash out instantly without thought.

If you're a big-brained overly thoughtful liberal sipping your tea as you analyze a case like this, it's incredibly difficult for you to put yourself in the headspace of someone like that.

I think that's actually a lot of what's behind the "policing us is unfair" type rhetoric. It's because it's actually true. It's not reasonable in the slightest to expect civilized behavior, and actually quite cruel to demand it.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Prior to this, there was no lynching here.

Charges brought based on public outrage are inherently illegitimate.

It was patently outrageous that this case was not going to come before a court. If you take someone’s life you must expect to face a trial.

You will be one of those people that whine about black athletes taking a knee.

No, if you operate a justice system that only works for one segment of society and you then ignore the outrage, one day it will boil over in violence.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

It was patently outrageous that this case was not going to come before a court. If you take someone’s life you must expect to face a trial.

If there's video showing the deceased lunging toward you, grabbing your firearm, punching you, etc. - I don't see why you should.

Really no matter what happened prior to that, the violent actions of the deceased in those final seconds left the man with the shotgun with very little choice. He could not permit this violent man to get control of his gun.

Edit:

Had this guy been innocent, had it been a misunderstanding - what would've played out was him putting his hands up, stopping, and saying something like "woah woah woah! what the hell guys?! I don't know who you think I am but you're mistaken! ---- Yeah! you bet I'll wait here for the cops! Just don't frigging shoot me in the meantime! I was just out for a jog!"

Him evading them and then when they finally made further evasion impossible, attacking them - up to and including trying to get the shotgun, indicates to me very clearly they had him exactly right. He was there to prey upon that community and had done so before. He knew they were proactive civic minded gentlemen trying to protect said community, and he decided he would do whatever it took to avoid being there when the police arrived. I think he knew for a certainty they were on the way. I think he would have killed the three white men without much hesitation at all, had he been able to get ahold of a firearm and do so.

 

[lionking]

In all seriousness, I think the chances of this are very close to zero.



It's really hard to say that kind of thing about someone in a moment like that, could have been in shock, etc. People sometimes look stunned or like their reaction is surprisingly mundane in moments like that. Just hard to say.

I honestly think they probably thought the odds they'd end up shooting the guy were pretty much zilch. I think, in fact, if they'd thought it was even a remote possibility they'd have sat it out and waited on the cops.

I think they were 100% convinced he would stop at the sight of them and their firearms and hang tight until police arrived to question him.

People are often shocked by the instantaneous, unthinking, impulsive violence of certain types.

The people who are overly sympathetic toward criminals often fail to realize, some people are just violent and are constitutionally incapable of making a sober, restrained "fight another day" or "well crap, they caught me" type of determination. They're thwarted in any way, and they lash out instantly without thought.

If you're a big-brained overly thoughtful liberal sipping your tea as you analyze a case like this, it's incredibly difficult for you to put yourself in the headspace of someone like that.

I think that's actually a lot of what's behind the "policing us is unfair" type rhetoric. It's because it's actually true. It's not reasonable in the slightest to expect civilized behavior, and actually quite cruel to demand it.

I’ve seen some world class victim blaming on this forum, but this post takes the cake. Congratulations.

 

[Sideroxylon]

I’ve seen some world class victim blaming on this forum, but this post takes the cake. Congratulations.

What a time to be alive, huh? I remember growing up in a world where truth and values seemed to exist. Now its seems an Orwellian **** storm.

 

[Sideroxylon]

If there's video showing the deceased lunging toward you, grabbing your firearm, punching you, etc. - I don't see why you should.

Really no matter what happened prior to that, the violent actions of the deceased in those final seconds left the man with the shotgun with very little choice. He could not permit this violent man to get control of his gun.

Edit:

Had this guy been innocent, had it been a misunderstanding - what would've played out was him putting his hands up, stopping, and saying something like "woah woah woah! what the hell guys?! I don't know who you think I am but you're mistaken! ---- Yeah! you bet I'll wait here for the cops! Just don't frigging shoot me in the meantime! I was just out for a jog!"

Him evading them and then when they finally made further evasion impossible, attacking them - up to and including trying to get the shotgun, indicates to me very clearly they had him exactly right. He was there to prey upon that community and had done so before. He knew they were proactive civic minded gentlemen trying to protect said community, and he decided he would do whatever it took to avoid being there when the police arrived. I think he knew for a certainty they were on the way. I think he would have killed the three white men without much hesitation at all, had he been able to get ahold of a firearm and do so.

They will have their day in court thanks to the public outrage.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Seems no different than when George Zimmerman murdered Trayvon Martin for being black, and outside.
ETA: as we've seen, some people here are okay with armed white supremacists storming into state houses, but a black guy walking home from the store should be shot dead.

Precisely right, in the sense that both are 100% BS narratives 180 degrees from the truth.

In both cases, the actions and choices of the deceased criminals led directly to their deaths, and in both cases a bunch of emotional, racially minded "individuals" who haven't seen the full evidence, and wouldn't understand it or pay attention to it if they did, start screaming on the internet and on the TV and then the "justice system" caves and charges someone they've already determined did nothing illegal.

 

[Meadmaker]

If it turns out that Arbery really was a criminal and really had been caught on surveillance cameras before, doing things that he ought not be doing, I will admit that my attitude toward the men in the pickup would change. However, even if that turns out to be the case, legally, it should make no difference. They still had no right to threaten him. Threatening him would still be a crime, and so his death would still be murder.

However, if it turns out that Arbery was a bad person after all, I would root for the guys to be able to plea bargain to a lesser charge. I would still want them in jail. I don't like the idea of people grabbing guns and deciding to use them. If you see someone you think is a criminal, grab your phone, not your gun.

As it is, though, I think the most likely scenario is that Arbery was a black man, and so was whoever was seen on whatever video, and these local boys decided that was all the evidence they needed to do whatever it was they intended to do.