GoOskie said:

---

There was justice today.

Can anyone explain the 4 counts of felony murder? Why four and not one?

---

I haven't looked at the actual charges here but my guess is that there are 4 different underlying felonies. "Felony Murder" is a crime when someone dies as a result of a felony you committed. EG if you break into someone's home and they get a heart attack from fright, you can get felony murder.

There is a lot more complication around the way the charge is used - for example you can't get felony murder for killing someone in a fight, where the fight is the underlying felony. The principle behind the charge is that if someone intentionally commits a felony and you can prove it, and you can prove someone died as a result of that felony, you don't need to prove the defendant intentionally killed the person.


Also this, lol.

Trump just called Georgia to see if they could find some not guilty verdicts.

— The USA Singers (@TheUSASingers) November 24, 2021

Republicans will be holding a candlelight vigil for the guilty on the grounds of Mara Lago.

GBear4Life said:

---

My brother just alerted me to this case this morning.

This is a tough case but of course the MSM is delusional on this one and it appears many who yearn to soak up its narrative are parroting it without a critical eye.

There are facts about Ahmed and what preceded the incident that do not affect the possible culpability of the two armed gunmen but the MSM media does not want to broadcast loudly as it of course harms the reputation of the suspect and enhances the case for the residents involved in the incident.

Ahmed was a criminal. He had been busted on theft, probation violations, and possession of a firearm. It's not relevant to the legality of the case, but please stop painting a ridiculously false image of the guy to serve binary narratives. His mother claims he was a "sweet boy" who was on a path to being an electrician. No corroboration of whether he was enrolled in classes and where, and any employment.

A 911 call from was made and gave the dispatcher an eyewitness account identified the suspect and described his clothes. Nobody in the neighborhood was looking to harass a black man. They were, in arguably an inadvisable fashion, tracking a down a suspect who had just trespassed a partially constructed property and who may have been the suspect in a string of robberies in the neighborhood. They wanted to address the suspect and make a "citizens' arrest", who continued fleeing them. Not my cup of tea, and I wouldn't advise it, but I understand the well intentioned motive behind it.

He was unarmed. An irrelevant fact to the legal proceedings. The suspect does not need to be armed to trigger a legal claim to self defense. Nobody involved ever claim he possessed a gun, outside of the gun that was in the hands of one of the two other men that they were in a struggle with .

Among the headlines and egregious statements made:

"They were vigilantes looking to commit a lynching in the middle of the street." No, they had reason to believe he was had just committed a crime, and may be behind a string of robberies in the neighborhood. The sensible move and the move that would have freed them from any possible legal liability or recourse was to follow the suspect until Police arrived. They sought out the conflict, and Ahmed escalated the conflict by engaging in an altercation with the man.

"He died doing what he loved"...only if you mean he loved trespassing.

So it's no surprise the prevailing narrative is purposefully being misreported when it really doesn't need to be to make your case, from either side.

While it's probable that Ahmed likes to jog through neighborhoods to spot opportunities to steal and can then resume jogging as his cover (that's what I suspect; it looks like he's wearing jean shorts but it's too tough to tell for sure), it doesn't have any relevance to the legal culpability of the two armed men.

It's also irrelevant (legally) whether Ahmed was a choir boy or Satan. It matters in terms of how we as individuals mourn his loss. But MSM and emotionally and politically driven actors know that it's hard to get the public behind it when the character of the deceased is deplorable. So they lie.

It also doesn't matter if we could peak into the gunmen's soul and discover they hate blacks.

This seems similar to the Trayvon case, where it's a tough one and even though the gunmen initiated the confrontation, and the result was a lost life, legally they have a viable claim to self defense. But as a former DA in Georgia noted the law does not permit "armed posses" to chase down a suspect of a crime"

---

The rights opening salvo

GBear4ShortLife

Some posters on this site find purpose by categorizing Republicans as racists who support the killing of Arbery.

dajo9 said:

---

How did GB4L get a lifetime ban?

---

I think a few of us got so under his skin that he amped up his posts and jettisoned himself into BI oblivion. I thought the poster that made death threats against me posted on this thread but he never did.
I got a guy pretty lathered up after the loss to Arizona when he claimed there was a conspiracy to undermine Cal football with enhanced Covid protocols but, alas, they did not suspend that drunk poster, they suspended moi.

The problem with all the RWNJ posters on BI, whether they be on this board or the sports boards (where they give themselves away by taking the Right Wing take on every sports issue) is:



*They are simply just too easy. In a sequence of give and take posts, you can get them so worked up that they want to break into the Capitol Building and take a dump on Pelosi's desk.

More justice forthcoming, hopefully...

Former Georgia district attorney booked on charges of obstructing Ahmaud Arbery case https://t.co/O5vMUctV8T

— CBS News (@CBSNews) November 25, 2021

bearister said:

---

"Brunswick, Georgia, will go down in history as the place that criminal justice took a different turn.
Let the word go forth all over the world, that a jury of 11 whites and one Black in the Deep South stood up in a courtroom and said that Black lives do matter." Rev. Al Sharpton

---

AHMAUD ARBERY’S FATHER: "All lives matter, not just blacks. We don't wanna see nobody go through this...It's all our problem. So hey, let's keep fighting, let's keep doing it, & making this place a better place for all human beings -- all human beings. Everybody. Love everybody." pic.twitter.com/E6CNUWv8Pp

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) November 24, 2021

Ahmaud Arbery's father's take is a little different.

oski003 said:

---

Some posters on this site find purpose by categorizing Republicans as racists who support the killing of Arbery.

---

Surprising number of Republicans believed the murderers should be found not guilty.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/shock-poll-only-a-third-of-republicans-thought-arbery-killers-should-be-found-guilty-54-were-not-sure/ar-AARb3n6

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Some posters on this site find purpose by categorizing Republicans as racists who support the killing of Arbery.

---

Surprising number of Republicans believed the murderers should be found not guilty.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/shock-poll-only-a-third-of-republicans-thought-arbery-killers-should-be-found-guilty-54-were-not-sure/ar-AARb3n6

---

Who's surprised? "A majority of Republicans have racist opinions! In other news, water is wet!"

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Some posters on this site find purpose by categorizing Republicans as racists who support the killing of Arbery.

---

Surprising number of Republicans believed the murderers should be found not guilty.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/shock-poll-only-a-third-of-republicans-thought-arbery-killers-should-be-found-guilty-54-were-not-sure/ar-AARb3n6

---

There are 330 million people in the United States. You project a minority of Republicans into the majority. For example, I understand that not all Democrats are looting rioters.

AunBear89 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Some posters on this site find purpose by categorizing Republicans as racists who support the killing of Arbery.

---

Surprising number of Republicans believed the murderers should be found not guilty.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/shock-poll-only-a-third-of-republicans-thought-arbery-killers-should-be-found-guilty-54-were-not-sure/ar-AARb3n6

---

Who's surprised? "A majority of Republicans have racist opinions! In other news, water is wet!"

---

54% were not sure. Reading comprehension alludes you.

I comprehend quite well. I comprehend that when given an option like that, some racists will avoid self identifying as such by picking the " don't know" option. These are people who think they are out smarting the poll by not outing themselves as racist, without understanding that responses to such surveys are often anonymous.

But you keep pretending that the modern GOP doesn't have racist roots.

Southern Strategy, anyone?

AunBear89 said:

---

I comprehend quite well. I comprehend that when given an option like that, some racists will avoid self identifying as such by picking the " don't know" option. These are people who think they are out smarting the poll by not outing themselves as racist, without understanding that responses to such surveys are often anonymous.

But you keep pretending that the modern GOP doesn't have racist roots.

Southern Strategy, anyone?

---

you must be outsmarting everyone by attributing a don't know answer to what your bias tells you.

Try Complete sentences if you want a serious discussion. Stick to gibberish if all you have is "I know you are, but what am I?" level replies.

AunBear89 said:

---

Try Complete sentences if you want a serious discussion. Stick to gibberish if all you have is "I know you are, but what am I?" level replies.

---

My writing is pretty clear and a complete sentence. Please return to reality.

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

AunBear89 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Some posters on this site find purpose by categorizing Republicans as racists who support the killing of Arbery.

---

Surprising number of Republicans believed the murderers should be found not guilty.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/shock-poll-only-a-third-of-republicans-thought-arbery-killers-should-be-found-guilty-54-were-not-sure/ar-AARb3n6

---

Who's surprised? "A majority of Republicans have racist opinions! In other news, water is wet!"

---

54% were not sure. Reading comprehension alludes you.

---

I find it interesting that so many Republicans were unsure about the Arbery case yet so few we're undecided about Rittenhouse. I don't think the answer is because the Rittenhouse case was a slam dunk compared to Arbery yet more than 2.5x Republicans were unsure about Arbery's murder compared to Rittenhouse (54% vs 21%). Even if you ignore undecideds, Republicans believed by more than 2/3 that Arbery's murderers should have been found not guilty.

I do find that curious and no doubt has a lot to do with conservative media. But I have no reason to discount the role of racism. Obviously the role of a reflexive contrarian is to poke holes in areas where he doesn't agree and ignore the manifest errors in places he does.

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/11/18/kyle-rittenhouse-perception-guilt-poll

---

If you exclude the undecideds, it is the opposite of what you say. Please read it again. 33% said guilty. ONLY 14% said Not Guilty.

---

I read that too fast, thanks for the correction. So my second point fails but the fact that so many were undecided is still interesting compared to the other trial.