1

Now this is a good example of a case where I can’t imagine self-defense would apply.

PS - I don’t know what exactly what the defense’s position is in this case.

5 Likes
2

They’re arguing a combined self-defense/citizen’s arrest theory.

1 Like
3

I agree.

1 Like
4

Yep, I see riots if they get off.

1 Like
5

I thought I heard something about this notion of a citizens arrest. I don’t know anything about the law in such a matter but to me that’s very dangerous since what the ■■■■ determines who and for what reasons that should be allowed? For example, what’s to prevent some whack job from arbitrarily deciding to arrest some random person because of some rumor they supposedly hear.

6

Most citizen’s arrest laws are poorly written, and Georgia’s is one of the worst. It’s an artifact of slavery.

It’s been repealed since Arbery’s death, but it was law when it occurred.

1 Like
7

They shouldn’t get off, or at least the father shouldn’t, at least from what I’ve seen. Not sure what the correct legal verdict should be?

1 Like
8

Even with Georgia’s incredibly bad citizen’s arrest law, I don’t see them getting off.

1 Like
9

They should ALL be repealed! The potential for abuse is infinite.

2 Likes
10

I agree.

But I think you’ll get some pushback on that from the right.

1 Like
11

There were riots before the arrests were made. Lib troublemakers don’t need much of or a consistent excuse to riot. For example, why are they threatening to riot if Kyle Rittenhouse gets off?

2 Likes
12

The guidelines, as you might call them, are written into the laws.

But Georgia’s law is (was) particularly ambiguous, and hard to interpret - exactly how you’d want a law governing vigilante behavior to be.

13

Do you know all the details in this case. I watched the video and heard some of the son’s testimony, but that’s about it.

14

I’ve followed it.

There was a thousand or so post thread on it, last year. I’ll try to find the link.

Edit: found it.

15

I don’t think those guys should get off at all. They need to go to prison.

Their behavior gave Arbery the right to defend himself, not themselves.

That said, trying to defend yourself against multiple armed men while unarmed is not a wise decision, but he had the right to try.

7 Likes
16

I am not interested in this case. That young man should not have been confronted as he was…even with video of him trespassing.

That was a matter for PD.

1 Like
17

Lots on righties were on their side before they found out the facts.

Once the facts came in, then the right becomes strangely silent.

Allan

2 Likes
18

Unlike those threatening violence over Rittenhouse.

Get off your high horse.

Patience and facts are good.

1 Like
19

Rittenhouse obviously is a more complicated case.

Did he reasonably fear for his life?

That’s the crux of the case.

Boy I am glad I am not a juror in that case.

It was chaos that night in Kenosha.

Allan

20

…and I might be one of the rioters? :sunglasses: :tumbler_glass:

2 Likes