Ahmaud Arbery Verdict

[Darrell]

From a  CNN news article: "Travis McMichael was found guilty of malice murder while the other defendants, Gregory McMichael and William "Roddie" Bryan Jr., were convicted on four and three of the counts of felony murder, respectively."  

I wonder how one is found guilty of FOUR counts of murder, when only one murder was committed. I've been trying to find some explanation, but so far am coming up empty. While I believe that the jury came to the correct conclusion, I just don't see how the murderers were convicted of more than one count each. Anyone have an explanation?

Edited November 24, 2021 by Darrell

[Garufa]

I am not an attorney, but as I understand it in Georgia, there were four underlying felonies committed against Arbery.  Each contributed to and resulted in his murder.  As such, each of those charges resulted in an additional murder charge.  Two counts of aggravated assault, one of false imprisonment, and one of attempt to commit false imprisonment.  Each of those four had a murder count added for a total of eight.   The ninth malice murder charge does not require some other felony charge.

https://apnews.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-trial-travis-mcmichael-georgia-7558b86305d4c95d8e830b16bf19eeff

[Whisper]

This is related to the way murder charges are handled under Georgia law and the fact that although there was only one murder, there were multiple defendants and multiple crimes (assault, false imprisonment) that led to the murder.  Do a search for Georgia homicide laws and you'll find much to read there.

EDITED:  Garufa explained it in better detail while I was posting this.

 

Edited November 24, 2021 by Whisper

[deerslayer]

Not very shocked by the verdict. 

[Whisper]

If you go and chase someone down, it's hard to claim self defense.

 

Edited November 25, 2021 by Whisper

[No_0ne]

2 hours ago, deerslayer said:

Not very shocked by the verdict. 

 

2 hours ago, Whisper said:

If you go and chase someone down, it's harm to claim self defense.

 

Yes, that part of their defense strategy seemed questionable, at best.  It's equally hard to argue a justifiable homicide of any sort when you chase an unarmed guy down, hold him, then kill him.  I'm not a lawyer, and didn't follow the case very closely, but pretty much everything I've read about it screamed murder from the start ...

[Grayfox54]

Stupid has consequences. 

[OLDNEWBIE]

From tidbits I saw seems Jury did it's job.

Trying to get timeline of cell phone guy though. He was called over to follow, started recording and got charged and convicted? I know I'm missing something.  Somebody told me he blocked victim with his truck.

Charge seems harsh maybe? Again I didn't follow trial and didn't even know third man was on trial. 

 

[No_0ne]

While I don't know the specifics of the local laws in this case, most states have statutes that say something to the effect that if you're present, and/or assisting in a crime that results in a murder, you're as guilty as the guy who pulled the trigger.  I suspect that the one you mentioned is at least guilty of that type of charge.  I'm good with frying the lot of them ...

[OLDNEWBIE]

24 minutes ago, No_0ne said:

While I don't know the specifics of the local laws in this case, most states have statutes that say something to the effect that if you're present, and/or assisting in a crime that results in a murder, you're as guilty as the guy who pulled the trigger.  I suspect that the one you mentioned is at least guilty of that type of charge.  I'm good with frying the lot of them ...

Turns out I found he did chase and block, as well as film.

Intent matters I feel. The other two chased a theft suspect with weapons. Easy correct verdict.

Other guy probably knew these idiot hot heads well enough to know they were armed vigilante types when they asked him to help.

If he knew them that well, the blocking would be cause for the harsh verdict. Assisting the killing.

If he was really just trying to help get vid of who he thought had been thieving... then different story but his lawyer or his testimony must have been deficient.

People film all manner of crimes nowadays and aren't usually charged. People often rush to get involved in things trying to help at first but suddenly turn ugly. 

When I get time I'm going to try and review his part of the trial.

[Links2k]

4 hours ago, OLDNEWBIE said:

Turns out I found he did chase and block, as well as film.

Intent matters I feel. The other two chased a theft suspect with weapons. Easy correct verdict.

Other guy probably knew these idiot hot heads well enough to know they were armed vigilante types when they asked him to help.

If he knew them that well, the blocking would be cause for the harsh verdict. Assisting the killing.

If he was really just trying to help get vid of who he thought had been thieving... then different story but his lawyer or his testimony must have been deficient.

People film all manner of crimes nowadays and aren't usually charged. People often rush to get involved in things trying to help at first but suddenly turn ugly. 

When I get time I'm going to try and review his part of the trial.

The video shown in court shows the home security camera video of the cameraman working on his porch when Ahmaud ran past the cameraman’s home. The cameraman calmly walked inside to retrieve his truck keys. The cameraman entered his truck and joined the pursuit. This event took 19 seconds according to the evidence. Sometimes it’s best to mind your business, especially when you’re not an actual witness to a transgression. 

[FUJIMO]

1 hour ago, Links2k said:

The video shown in court shows the home security camera video of the cameraman working on his porch when Ahmaud ran past the cameraman’s home. The cameraman calmly walked inside to retrieve his truck keys. The cameraman entered his truck and joined the pursuit. This event took 19 seconds according to the evidence. Sometimes it’s best to mind your business, especially when you’re not an actual witness to a transgression. 

Short of getting your ass killed NOT doing it, Mr. "roddie" learned a very important lesson in this.

Edited November 27, 2021 by FUJIMO

[Omega]

I didn't follow the case, so like most here I had thought it was an open and shut case of murder, but the more comes out the more I think maybe we didn't get the entire story.

Edited December 15, 2021 by Omega
Add info

[Grayfox54]

10 minutes ago, Omega said:

I think maybe we didn't get the entire story.

We never get the entire story. We only get the parts that the liberal media wants us to see to fit in with their agenda. 

[Capbyrd]

16 hours ago, Omega said:

I didn't follow the case, so like most here I had thought it was an open and shut case of murder, but the more comes out the more I think maybe we didn't get the entire story.

The problem with this argument is that they didn't meet the probable cause requirement according to any attorney at trial, or the attorneys that I was watching comment on the case.   If the probable cause requirement was met, they likely could have been acquitted.  But it wasn't met.  

[Grayfox54]

Reminds me of George Floyd. Understand that I'm in no way excusing the actions of that cop. He was wrong and got what he deserved. 

But Floyd was made out to be poor innocent citizen victimized by law enforcement because of his color. Truth is that if he hadn't been high as a kite and committing a crime, the police would never have been called in the first place.