Rittenhouse Trial

[vantexan]

Does someone who is deputized by the sheriff have a right to arrest someone?

Were they?

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Were they?

According to Arbery family, yes. I don't really agree, but, maybe we should hear them out.....

 

[El Correcto]

If stand your ground were a legitimate defense in this case, people who don't like you or think you look suspicious could stop you in the street, accuse you of a crime, hold you at gunpoint and shoot you upon any sign of physical resistance.

Believe joe horn shot two men in the back, certainly to death either way over his neighbors property while being told not to by 911, didn’t try to detain them first or anything. Shot them dead.

 

[Sportello]

You're moving the goalposts.
Read my question again Susie:

That's a yes/no question that you're dodging.

Seek help

 

[Sportello]

Wrong!
Read up on “Stand your Ground” laws and variance by state.

I’m not a lawyer, but perhaps you know exactly how that relates in the Georgia case. Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain that to the rest of us non-lawyers

 

[El Correcto]

I’m not a lawyer, but perhaps you know exactly how that relates in the Georgia case. Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain that to the rest of us non-lawyers

Guy was messing with his neighbors property with a history thefts on going in the area. Dude was trespassing, they tried to detain him, dude fought for a gun turning it life or death.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

If they didn't see him running from that property they could only speculate as to what a black man was doing running through that neighborhood. If you're going to pull a gun on someone better have all the i's dotted and t's crossed. I'm 100% for protecting property and bringing criminals to justice. I'm not in favor of average citizens running around with guns making the wrong assumptions and nervously reacting to situations they aren't trained to handle. They may have been 100% right that Arbery was the right guy and had broken into that property. But they didn't know for sure and the best course would have been to alert law enforcement and keep a visual of Arbery. By the way how did the homeowner know from looking at security footage who Arbery was and how would these two guys know exactly who he was and what he looked like? Was Arbery identified after his death as the guy on security footage? How would that have helped these guys before he was shot?

Whether what the defendents based their decisions on was speculation, or a reasonable belief that Arbery had committed a felony will be up to the jury to decide. Our system can only work with a presumption of innocence. That's hard to accomplish when high profile cases get splashed all over the news and people start forming opinions other than that the defendant(s) is (are) innocent.

What you're in favor of and what rights and the law allows for are two different things. People kept saying Kyle "shouldn't have been there", where? Kenosha? Why shouldn't he have been there? On what basis is that claim made?

 

[zubenelgenubi]

I would hate to be the lawyer arguing that he was armed because he grabbed the end of the gun pointed at him.

That's the standard. That's why everyone Kyle shot was armed.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

When will people learn to not make up their minds about a case based on the incomplete information and biased twist the media presents?

 

[oldngray]

When will people learn to not make up their minds about a case based on the incomplete information and biased twist the media presents?

Rittenhouse was always a political trial to try to placate the rioters. Murder charges just hours after the shootings before any investigation had been done.

 

[oldngray]

7 Unreal Moments from the Rittenhouse Prosecutor's Closing Argument

townhall.com

 

[BrownFlush]

Citizen's arrest was legal in Georgia when this happened.

Had to.

 

[vantexan]

Whether what the defendents based their decisions on was speculation, or a reasonable belief that Arbery had committed a felony will be up to the jury to decide. Our system can only work with a presumption of innocence. That's hard to accomplish when high profile cases get splashed all over the news and people start forming opinions other than that the defendant(s) is (are) innocent.

What you're in favor of and what rights and the law allows for are two different things. People kept saying Kyle "shouldn't have been there", where? Kenosha? Why shouldn't he have been there? On what basis is that claim made?

I'll answer that. He was a 17 year old with a gun in the middle of a riot. The shootings certainly looked justified to me, but if I was his dad I'd be screaming bloody murder at him for being there to begin with. Legal or not it was stupid.

I doubt if their "reasonable belief" is covered by a law. Where's Arbery's presumption of innocence?

 

[wilberforce15]

I'll answer that. He was a 17 year old with a gun in the middle of a riot. The shootings certainly looked justified to me, but if I was his dad I'd be screaming bloody murder at him for being there to begin with. Legal or not it was stupid.

I doubt if their "reasonable belief" is covered by a law. Where's Arbery's presumption of innocence?

Arbery doesn't get presumption of innocence because that exists for courts and media.

He wasn't shot for trespassing or stealing.

He was shot for trying to kill people.

 

[Sportello]

Guy was messing with his neighbors property with a history thefts on going in the area. Dude was trespassing, they tried to detain him, dude fought for a gun turning it life or death.

I don’t think you’ll do very well when the vigilantes rule.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

I'll answer that. He was a 17 year old with a gun in the middle of a riot. The shootings certainly looked justified to me, but if I was his dad I'd be screaming bloody murder at him for being there to begin with. Legal or not it was stupid.

I doubt if their "reasonable belief" is covered by a law. Where's Arbery's presumption of innocence?

As for your Kyle comment, you are conflating what you think people should do with what is lawful for them to do. The riots themselves take on an extra layer of illegality if they prevent someone from doing something they have every right to do. It's a form of kidnapping.

As to you Arbery comment, yes, reasonable belief that someone committed a felony (which burglary is) is the standard in GA for being within your rights to attempt to detain someone who is fleeing. Any lesser crimes you have to witness it. It will be up to the jury to determine if they had such a reasonable belief.

 

[El Correcto]

I don’t think you’ll do very well when the vigilantes rule.

And no one does well when the marxists rule.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

The courts hate the Constitution? Is the right to jury nullification in the Constitution?

It is in Georgia!
And the judges and lawyers hate it!

 

[Old Man Jingles]

John Jay gave an opinion. It's not spelled out in the Constitution. Juries may ignore the law in their verdict but that doesn't make their verdict the last word on a given matter. We have judges and appeals courts for a reason.

Not if the verdict is Not Guilty.

 

[vantexan]

As for your Kyle comment, you are conflating what you think people should do with what is lawful for them to do. The riots themselves take on an extra layer of illegality if they prevent someone from doing something they have every right to do. It's a form of kidnapping.

As to you Arbery comment, yes, reasonable belief that someone committed a felony (which burglary is) is the standard in GA for being within your rights to attempt to detain someone who is fleeing. Any lesser crimes you have to witness it. It will be up to the jury to determine if they had such a reasonable belief.

Are you in Georgia? Wilbur posted the law earlier. Says nothing about reasonable belief.

And I'm not conflating anything. I'm well aware of someone's right to do something. Just saying that the owner of that property should have never put a kid in that situation and the parent of said kid would probably go ballistic over their kid putting themselves in that situation. Not talking about his right to defend himself. Having found himself facing crazed rioters I'm glad he had that gun. With all the talk about how this kid killed two people, wounding a third, I'd like to know where are the other trials for the killers of all those killed by rioters that summer? Where are all the trials for those who severely injured others? All the feigned outrage but they don't seem the least concerned with prosecuting rioters for anything no matter how egregious.