New leaked video of black jogger gunned down by a white father and son duo

originally posted by: matafuchs
Georgia Law since you keep asking but will not post.....

It is Felony Burglary if there is intent.

He didn't steal so there was no intent... Even with criminal trespassing there also needs intent.

Trespassing is a fairly broad crime in Georgia. ... There are numerous ways criminal trespassing; A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less.

You can say he trespassed, but you can not call it criminal trespassing since he didn't also do anything like steal or vandalized anything. And even if he did do some kind of intent then it would still be a misdemeanor.

If someone sees or has immediate knowledge of the crime they can attempt to hold the suspect

The dad didn't know he was in the building that day, nothing was ever stolen so what crime did he witness or have immediate knowledge of to get their guns and chase him down in their truck?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Newsflash, the people who he thinks did it were driving a car and, wait for it, those people were white.

AhhhhhhHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Like I said before, "Over and over and over."

a reply to: Snarl

Did you listen to the description?* Doesn't sound like Arbery since he didn't have tattoos down both arms. Nice try. Not.



*That was rhetorical because if you did you wouldn't have gotten caught with your pants around your ankles again.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Snarl

I'm not purposely being hard headed. We are to assume that every person on video in that site had the intent to steal? All that qualifies is entering the premises? So misdemeanor trespassing does not exist? If you enter it's a felony because you must have an intent? That makes no sense.

LOL. Are you still debating that guy, Snarl? He's trolling and doing a good job. You and I both know he doesn't believe what he's typing.

a reply to: matafuchs

Ask the kids on bikes who were in the open site, ask the couple who were in there at 10 at night. That's what I'm saying, why is this guy the only one who supposedly was trespassing with intent, but all these fine other upstanding citizens got a pass from a citizens arrest.

originally posted by: Jaellma

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Snarl

I'm not purposely being hard headed. We are to assume that every person on video in that site had the intent to steal? All that qualifies is entering the premises? So misdemeanor trespassing does not exist? If you enter it's a felony because you must have an intent? That makes no sense.

LOL. Are you still debating that guy, Snarl? He's trolling and doing a good job. You and I both know he doesn't believe what he's typing.

Lol, true. The conversation goes nowhere. I will admit he is right to an extent. I was not trying to be, but I have been told many times I'm hard headed. I blame it on my Italian ethnicity.

a reply to: frogs453

If it was me I would have confronted them also. Turn over the tapes to police and maybe they know the people. However, at those times, no one was alerted. Someone saw a person go into an unoccupied dwelling and police were called this time. Then people saw him running out. Why was he running out? At that point there was NO fear if he was just getting some water. Would you not think it was the least suspicious. Maybe not get in your truck suspicious but odd. I would. I would think someone stole something and was bolting...

If those guys would not have seen it happen that day and the kid bolt like he did nothing would have happened.

originally posted by: frogs453

Ask the kids on bikes who were in the open site, ask the couple who were in there at 10 at night. That's what I'm saying, why is this guy the only one who supposedly was trespassing with intent, but all these fine other upstanding citizens got a pass from a citizens arrest.

Add the millions of people each year that go look at houses being built in their area. We also need to understand that the owner of the house has come out against all actions by the father and son AND has said he has never had anything stolen, so this isn't an owner saying something like watch and defend my house to a neighbor.

originally posted by: matafuchs

If those guys would not have seen it happen that day and the kid bolt like he did nothing would have happened.

The dad didn't see him run out...never knew he was there that day. Only saw him the first time that day jogging down the street. Remember this all is happening in the middle of the afternoon not late at night.


His dad said in the police report "I saw him running down the street and turned to my son and said there he is!" My assumption he was thinking that was the guy who stole his gun, but nothing but assumptions on that.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Snarl

Did you listen to the description?* Doesn't sound like Arbery since he didn't have tattoos down both arms. Nice try. Not.

AhhhhhhhhhhHAHAHAHAHAH

What's that? Tatts? You're just lying Augustus. It's still fun for me. But, your credibility is forever in the tank.

*That was rhetorical because if you did you wouldn't have gotten caught with your pants around your ankles again.

Okay one last thing. The way this will actually play out in trial, is the prosecution side will have their case and arguments, one part of that will be the crimes Ahmaud committed. They then have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, to the people making the final judgments, that no felony occurred/Ahamud was doing nothing wrong/the McMichaels had no justification to determine what they viewed and saw as a felony.

That's it. If the prosecution fails to convince beyond a reasonable doubt their narrative of the circumstances, to the people making the judgement, then the McMichaels will be justified in conducting/attempting a citizen's arrest. And most likely at that point the people making the judgement will decide they are not guilty. There is no "truth" here, specifically regarding the crime situation, Ahmaud cant be put on trial to determine his guilt. The prosecution just has to do a good enough job to convince people, and if they fail then that's the "truth."

It is why the truth is nearly impossible to ever have and why we dont run things based on "perfect truth." Because we are not all knowing, and our judgments end up being heavily informed and influenced by our views, beliefs, fears, biases and so on.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: matafuchs





If those guys would not have seen it happen that day and the kid bolt like he did nothing would have happened.

The dad didn't see him run out...never knew he was there that day. Only saw him the first time that day jogging down the street. Remember this all is happening in the middle of the afternoon not late at night.


His dad said in the police report "I saw him running down the street and turned to my son and said he is!" My assumption he was thinking that was the guy who stole his gun, but nothing but assumptions on that.

I believe you are right, I would have to go back through links but didn't the son or whoever called say something like he's running down the street and he's done a bunch of burglaries?

originally posted by: matafuchs
Someone saw a person go into an unoccupied dwelling and police were called this time.

Wrong.

Father Yahoo went into his home to let Son Yahoo know that Arbery was 'hauling ass down the street', they didn't call 911 until after the chase had begun.

originally posted by: Snarl
What's that? Tatts?

'Tats' is plural, that's one and certainly not 'up and down both arms' like English reported. Let me know when you find that.

Nice try though. Not really.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
'Tats' is plural, that's one and certainly not 'up and down both arms' like English reported. Let me know when you find that.

Nice try though. Not really.

Wellll ... I found you a pic with 'tats' ... you find me one with the rest of his arms running bare. I'd also like you to prove what English 'meant' when he said up and down. I think English is prone to taking liberties with his descriptions ... like somebody else around here. -chuckle

a reply to: Xtrozero

Exactly. Killed a guy over assumptionsm now they should go to jail. Who wants these father/son vigilantes free?

originally posted by: Snarl
Wellll ... I found you a pic with 'tats' …

No, you found a pic with one.

...you find me one with the rest of his arms running bare.

Not my job, chief, that's yours since you think he did it when you linked the video with the description of a black man with tattoos running up and down his arm. If you're saying you don't have anything else then I guess your video is inconclusive.

But inconclusive is good enough for the two yahoo retards that shot him and look where that got them.

originally posted by: frogs453

I believe you are right, I would have to go back through links but didn't the son or whoever called say something like he's running down the street and he's done a bunch of burglaries?

Yep, which was a false statement unless he was assuming he was the person who stole his gun. Pure assumptions, but I can't think of anything else that would have made it so personal for the father to do what he did.

a reply to: matafuchs

Yahoo's isn't a racist term. Funny how you're bending over backwards to defend two white killers of any prejudice or racism, but not made one single comment about that clearly racist white lady who called the cops on the black guy for no reason.

Seems your social outrage only extends to white people.

originally posted by: blueman12
a reply to: matafuchs

Yahoo's isn't a racist term. Funny how you're bending over backwards to defend two white killers of any prejudice or racism, but not made one single comment about that clearly racist white lady who called the cops on the black guy for no reason.

Seems your social outrage only extends to white people.

I have no clue if they are racist or not, but I do know they did something so criminally wrong it cost a man his life.