Cont: Jogging in Georgia while black - The Trial
- Thread starter smartcooky
- Start date
plague311
Great minds think...
He hasn't taken any ******** or anything either. He just doesn't seem like the type of judge that, after reading them the riot act on sentencing, would then flip and say, "But sure, make some cash off of it!" lol
But yeah the right outcome. I'm even sorta okay with out man out getting a (technically) lighter sentence in the context and reasoning of how it happened in this case.
Hopefully the appeals are smacked down quick and hard without any legal buffonary and this sends a message to the next racist cowboy wannabe and the next member of the good ole' boy network that tries to cover it up.
As I've said now on to the original DA who buried it and anyone who assisted in that.
And the Federal Trial, but that's sort of shutting the barn door at this point, although still a necessary step.
Hopefully the appeals are smacked down quick and hard without any legal buffonary and this sends a message to the next racist cowboy wannabe and the next member of the good ole' boy network that tries to cover it up.
As I've said now on to the original DA who buried it and anyone who assisted in that.
And the Federal Trial, but that's sort of shutting the barn door at this point, although still a necessary step.
plague311
Great minds think...
I would actually like the Federal government to not go ahead with a trial at this point. I have two reasons behind my mindset:
1) If, for some reason, the governor gets a wild hair and lets them out after a few years, I would like the feds to still have the option of going in and prosecuting. They could hold onto it until someone like Trump isn't in the White House, should the nightmare of him winning again actually occur.
2) Neither Federal nor State prison are any fun, but Federal prison is much easier time than State. If they get convicted federally, they could put in a request to do their time in a Federal prison. I'd like them to do all of their time in a GA state prison. Where a lot of the inmates, more than a few wrongfully accused and disproportionately sentenced, will be giving them a harder time. The racial numbers are more kind to them in Federal prison, per my extremely brief google search.
That being said, if a Gov were to pardon them and Trump won, he could still pardon them for the federal charges. I just think he'd be too rock bottom stupid to remember it, or he'd just tell his DoJ not to prosecute, which would still preserve the option should a later DoJ want to try them considering there's no SoL on murder.
I'm rambling though cause I'm bored as **** at work.
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
Probably not going to be many besides overt white nationalists.
There was no shortage of "mainstream" conservatives willing to explain how the shooting was unfortunate but perfectly legal back during the coverup though. Strange how that works out.
I really like that in sentencing the Judge was so able to see through, as he put it, the McMichael's attempt to create a "narrative" that was in complete opposition to their actions and basically ignored all the made up after the fact talk about citizens arrest and what McMichael's would later claim was his reasoning in deference of the cold hard facts of what McMichael's did and how he acted on the actual day.
In other words I like that he sentenced the "I've got him cornered, I'm going to blow his ****** head off, I'm not even sure if he committed a crime" McMichaels that actually existed on the day of the murder and not the "Oh us? We're just poor widdle folks defending our neighborhood" McMichaels that they tried to retcon later.
In other words I like that he sentenced the "I've got him cornered, I'm going to blow his ****** head off, I'm not even sure if he committed a crime" McMichaels that actually existed on the day of the murder and not the "Oh us? We're just poor widdle folks defending our neighborhood" McMichaels that they tried to retcon later.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
I'm pretty sure there will be a couple of posters on this forum screaming into their alphabet soup about how these three Good 'Ol Boys weren't able to get away with an honest lynchin' of that goddamn ******.
Last edited:
plague311
Great minds think...
Peripheral things I learned from the McMichael's trial.
1) Do not give a **** what your neighbors think about you because it'll make you do stupid things.
2) Don't record yourself killing anyone
3) If you're too ******* stupid for #2, be sure to delete any video after the fact. Destroy your phone, your friends phone, and any other digital format with it.
That's about it.
1) Do not give a **** what your neighbors think about you because it'll make you do stupid things.
2) Don't record yourself killing anyone
3) If you're too ******* stupid for #2, be sure to delete any video after the fact. Destroy your phone, your friends phone, and any other digital format with it.
That's about it.
Again it's almost depressing that in order to get justice all we have to do is get the criminals to:
1. Be completely open and just bold about their crimes.
2. Record it.
3. Release to the Press.
4. Cause enough national outrage that the original coverup is undone.
1. Be completely open and just bold about their crimes.
2. Record it.
3. Release to the Press.
4. Cause enough national outrage that the original coverup is undone.
I don't know what the statute of limitations is on the federal charges, but there likely is one. It's also harder to win a conviction years after the event. Witnesses die or their memories fade, evidence disappears, jurors might think "this is old news," etc. Getting a conviction now, if they can, is the right strategy. The feds could still defer sentencing, or ask that the federal sentence only kick in if the state conviction fails.
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
No kidding. Just spoke on the phone with my Attorney sister, and the general opinion at the law firm she works at is the defense was incredibly inept.
You don't try the "but they were nice people who helped other people" argument with a judge before sentencing. Before a Jury , maybe, but not a judge.
iMHO the defendents got what they deserved. But no doubt they will become maytrys to the MAGA crowd, who think that a white man has the right to shoot a black man whenver he feels like it.
Last edited:
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
"I want to talk With Southern Gentlemen.
Put My White Sheet on Again,
I Ain't Seen a Good Lynching In Years"
Tom Lehrer "I Want To Go Back To Dixie".
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,955
I do not understand the sentences, how can you have life plus twenty? Do they leave the body in prison for twenty years?
Rational sentences would be life without possibility of parole, life (with a minimum term served) with possibility of parole. Anything else seems nonsense.
In general I think sentences without possibility of parole are foolish. It commits the state to possible unnecessary expense e.g. if the culprit has a major disabling illness, or develops dementia by keeping them in prison when they could receive care and be no danger out of prison. It denies the possibility of rehabilitation, and in reality in twenty to thirty years it is unlikely any of these persons will be a danger to anyone, so prevention is not justified. Thirty years is probably a sufficient deterrence, if you think that prison would act as a deterrence (it obviously did not in this case).
- In many states "life" doesn't literally mean until dead.
- In many states you can get time off, even a "life sentence" for good behavior or other reason.
- In prison overcrowding situations, early release is often given based on time left. Doing this ensures someone stays at the bottom of this list.
Of course not, and you know it. But a court might impose multiple sentences for different charges so that if one conviction is overturned for some reason, the other(s) might keep him locked him.
Astonishing isn't it that the original prosecutor decided that there was no crime to answer for. I've no idea why he decided that these white men, one an ex-cop killing a black man hadn't committed a crime.
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 7,686
One of the things I find most interesting about this case is the demonstration of witness fallibility. Bodycam video shows Roddie talking about what happened. He says repeatedly and confidently that when Arbery ran past the truck, Greg got out of the truck and was in front and was pointing his pistol at Arbery. When questioned about the details, he said he wasn't sure if he saw Greg get out of the truck or exactly what he did, but he did know that he saw Greg in front of the truck and saw him pointing his pistol at Arbery.
That didn't happen. We have video that shows that Greg was in the back of the truck the whole time. There is no reason for Roddie to lie about that. It is very strange that he had that false memory.
That didn't happen. We have video that shows that Greg was in the back of the truck the whole time. There is no reason for Roddie to lie about that. It is very strange that he had that false memory.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
FTFY
Its very simple...
1. This happened in redneck country, where a goodly number of the inhabitants, including plenty of cops, don't consider killing mud people to be a crime.
2. The original prosecutor, Jackie Johnson, is white, and she is a former colleague of McMichael senior.... "jus' lookin' out fer her own kind y'all!"
Note. Johnson has now been charged with
- Violation of Oath of Public Officer – a felony that carries 1-5 years.
- Obstruction and Hindering a Law Enforcement Officer – a misdemeanor that carries up to 12 months.
https://law.georgia.gov/press-relea...ent-former-brunswick-da-violation-oath-public
Last edited: