Jump to content
tanknet.org

When Defending Cops Becomes Impossible


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As I understand it, unless they had just seen him commit a crime, they had no right to confront him. Being on video committing a crime sometime before doesn't count.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, unless they had just seen him commit a crime, they had no right to confront him. Being on video committing a crime sometime before doesn't count.

 

Right. This new video actually changes... nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll see what the Grand Jury decides and then the trial if any. Still, were I them, I wouldn't be making any plans for the next reversal years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, they are on their fourth prosecutor: https://www.dailywire.com/news/fourth-prosecutor-takes-ahmaud-arbery-case-after-third-prosecutor-steps-down As I read this, the prosecutors are wanting no part of this case, as they see a lose-lose.

Can the Feds / FBI move in on a 'depriving of human rights' situation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hmmm, they are on their fourth prosecutor: https://www.dailywire.com/news/fourth-prosecutor-takes-ahmaud-arbery-case-after-third-prosecutor-steps-down As I read this, the prosecutors are wanting no part of this case, as they see a lose-lose.

Can the Feds / FBI move in on a 'depriving of human rights' situation?

 

I think you need a very outside prosecutor to handle this one. It is not a federal issue, but a states one, and this is tailor made for the Attorney General to send in an experienced prosecutor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, unless they had just seen him commit a crime, they had no right to confront him. Being on video committing a crime sometime before doesn't count.

Correct, Georgia law is VERY clear that citizen's arrest can ONLY take place legally if you witness the felony in person and then it has to be right then, not days after the fact. In particular, one must witness it and then, upon arresting the individual, one must take them 'with speed' to a magistrate judge. There is also very little if any civil liability protections for a citizen making such an arrest.

 

Based on what I've heard so far, it sounds like a false imprisonment charge to be filed agains them AND a manslaughter if not murder in the second degree based on the death due to that false imprisonment going wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I expected, Ahmaud was a habitual offender, and was being investigated for recent crimes (thus known to the PD and DA's office).

 

And apparently, the owner of the property lives nowhere near the property in question, and is receiving death threats.

 

Its probably going to boil down to whether the GJ thinks McMichaels had probable cause for a citizen's arrest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't actually matter if he was the thief they thought he was or any kind of criminal or not They need to have seen him just commit a crime before they can arrest him. Going onto an unposted, unfenced construction site without apparently doing anything else is not a crime in Georgia. More evidence might come out and Grand Juries aren't entirely predictable, but it doesn't look good for the shooters.

 

The death threats to the uninvolved property owner and the witnesses are entirely unjustified. It would be best if activists deescalated pending the trial now the system seems to be working as it should, but that won't happen. The delay in proceeding with charges is either very unlucky or deeply stupid on the part of the local cops and DA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, they are on their fourth prosecutor: https://www.dailywire.com/news/fourth-prosecutor-takes-ahmaud-arbery-case-after-third-prosecutor-steps-down As I read this, the prosecutors are wanting no part of this case, as they see a lose-lose.

 

How is this a lose if they get a conviction on the father and son who have been arrested?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, they are on their fourth prosecutor: https://www.dailywire.com/news/fourth-prosecutor-takes-ahmaud-arbery-case-after-third-prosecutor-steps-down As I read this, the prosecutors are wanting no part of this case, as they see a lose-lose.

Weren't the two first close to the arrested people?

 

/R

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hmmm, they are on their fourth prosecutor: https://www.dailywire.com/news/fourth-prosecutor-takes-ahmaud-arbery-case-after-third-prosecutor-steps-down As I read this, the prosecutors are wanting no part of this case, as they see a lose-lose.

 

How is this a lose if they get a conviction on the father and son who have been arrested?

 

Hard to explain, but elected prosecutors always look out for cases that might affect their re-election chances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine if enough people think this is a politically inspired prosecution rather than one where the prima facie evidence justifies it, then an elected DA would be reluctant.

 

Of course, depending on a constituency's demographics, this could help a DA get reelected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It certainly could, although the implications for justice in America become alarming if this is the basis for handing it down.

 

How is this a lose if they get a conviction on the father and son who have been arrested?

 

Community retaliation against the prosecutor and his or her family comes to mind, unfortunately.

Edited by Nobu
Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda dislike the idea that DAs (or sheriffs) would be elected officials instead of civil servants. But no experience how it'd work, in bad or good, obviously.

 

That re-election thing can cause all sorts of quirks.

 

Thus, I can see reluctance of any DA to touch this case, since no matter which way it goes, they are going to lose support from one group or another. Thus lose-lose.

 

Not that I am expert of US judicial system, just my understanding of the situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda dislike the idea that DAs (or sheriffs) would be elected officials instead of civil servants. But no experience how it'd work, in bad or good, obviously.

 

That re-election thing can cause all sorts of quirks.

 

Thus, I can see reluctance of any DA to touch this case, since no matter which way it goes, they are going to lose support from one group or another. Thus lose-lose.

 

Not that I am expert of US judicial system, just my understanding of the situation.

That is exactly my thoughts about elected Sheriffs and DAs. I can almost understand it in the USian context, but it raises issues with me about upholding the law (or not upholding the law) to please the voters rather than to meet the standards of the law itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have an experiment with police Commissioners, over here they are called a Police and Crime Commissioner's. The main thing im taking away with it is they have not inspired the public to go out and vote in large numbers, and seem to have completely failed to have brought crime rate down. Its another of those stupid ideas by Westminster politicians that amounts to moving furniture around on the Titanic, and distracting people from not enough money being applied to policing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_and_crime_commissioner

 

I too cant get my head around why you would want to vote for a DA. Not that political shenanigans sometimes dont creep into our system, but at least they are not politicians making decisions based purely on being reelected. That is a really strange idea to get my head around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the ex-cop forgot he was ex.

Most likely. Also what he should have done is call 9-1-1 and follow, but not engage. I suspect a conviction on manslaughter or perhaps a similar charge. Murder is too big a stretch (at least under Texas law) because you have to "Knowingly and intentionally" cause the death of a person. I have not read the Georgia murder statute, but I would be suprised if they were too different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I kinda dislike the idea that DAs (or sheriffs) would be elected officials instead of civil servants. But no experience how it'd work, in bad or good, obviously.

 

That re-election thing can cause all sorts of quirks.

 

Thus, I can see reluctance of any DA to touch this case, since no matter which way it goes, they are going to lose support from one group or another. Thus lose-lose.

 

Not that I am expert of US judicial system, just my understanding of the situation.

That is exactly my thoughts about elected Sheriffs and DAs. I can almost understand it in the USian context, but it raises issues with me about upholding the law (or not upholding the law) to please the voters rather than to meet the standards of the law itself.

 

I love it in the case of Sheriff's because we are closer to the people, and any sheriff who gets too heavy handed, gets booted out. It forces Sheriff's and their deputies to be more community oriented. Police are totally insulated from the people, and therefore DGAS too often. But then again, I have worked for elected bosses for 26 years now. Do politics sometimes rear their ugly heads, yep, but in the end, we always manage to do the right thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda dislike the idea that DAs (or sheriffs) would be elected officials instead of civil servants. But no experience how it'd work, in bad or good, obviously.

 

That re-election thing can cause all sorts of quirks.

 

Thus, I can see reluctance of any DA to touch this case, since no matter which way it goes, they are going to lose support from one group or another. Thus lose-lose.

 

Not that I am expert of US judicial system, just my understanding of the situation.

Non-elected officials have a layer of insulation from the people, and can therefore act much more capriciously and not worry about accountability as much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...