Ahmaud Arbery; racist killing and attempted cover up.

[MaxVel]

If I night offer some guidance on that point...

It would be very difficult to prove "entering with intent to steal", even if something were subsequently stolen.
I don't think you'll find that term in any legal dictionary or any relevant codified ordinance.
Trespassing would not be a felony - it would usually be about a Class B Misdemeanor.
Observing somebody trespassing on somebody else's private property does not trigger a justification for arrest, citizen or otherwise, without authorization of the property owner

Ok, thanks for the clarification. Looking back at this, what I should have said is that:

(A) entering the property without permission is 'criminal trespass' (a misdemeanor AFAIK)

A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority:

(1) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose;

(2) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant that such entry is forbidden; or

(3) Remains upon the land or premises of another person or within the vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant to depart.

(B) if someone trespasses with the intent to steal, or steals something, it becomes 'first degree burglary' (a felony, AFAIK)

A person commits the offense of burglary in the first degree when, without authority and with the intent to commit a felony or theft therein, he or she enters or remains within an occupied, unoccupied, or vacant dwelling house of another or any building, vehicle, railroad car, watercraft, aircraft, or other such structure designed for use as the dwelling of another. A person who commits the offense of burglary in the first degree shall be guilty of a felony

I notice that in both A and B above intent or purpose on the part of the offender is part of the law. It seems to me that generally, one would need to talk to the suspect to begin to establish whether or not there was such intent or purpose. I suppose if one saw a suspect forcing a window and then climbing in, one would have reasonable grounds to assume intent, and thus, apprehend the suspect. If not, then one would need to talk to them (Why were they in the building?) to confirm or deny such intent or purpose.


(C) I'm not sure exactly what the Georgia law is on citizen's arrests - if you see someone possibly committing a felony, does that give you legal justification for a citizen's arrest?

Ok, found it:

O.C.G.A. 17-4-60 (2010)
17-4-60. Grounds for arrest


A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

So, there's a chain of 'if's' here. If Arbery had intent to steal, then he was committing a felony. If he had committed a felony and was attempting to escape, then anyone could make a citizen's arrest.

So,.... it is a possibility that the McMichaels ticked the boxes in that chain. I'm doubtful that they can maintain that in court, however. I don't know what the law is on the use of force in a citizen's arrest.


(D) Also, on the younger McMichael holding a shotgun, it seems that he was following the law (unless he was in an "unauthorised area"). By law, if the gun is loaded, he must carry it openly and fully exposed.

The long gun may be carried either openly or concealed, so long as it is unloaded (meaning no round in the chamber). If the firearm is loaded, it must be carried openly and in a “fully exposed manner,”

Disclaimer for the race-baiters among us: None of the above is intended to make any comment on the rights and wrongs of the case, or to blame of justify anyone. My intent is to give relevant background information that may help us understand better what happened.

[Cow Poke]

Ok, thanks for the clarification. Looking back at this, what I should have said is that:

(A) entering the property without permission is 'criminal trespass' (a misdemeanor AFAIK)

(B) if someone trespasses with the intent to steal, or steals something, it becomes 'first degree burglary' (a felony, AFAIK)

I notice that in both A and B above intent or purpose on the part of the offender is part of the law. It seems to me that generally, one would need to talk to the suspect to begin to establish whether or not there was such intent or purpose. I suppose if one saw a suspect forcing a window and then climbing in, one would have reasonable grounds to assume intent, and thus, apprehend the suspect. If not, then one would need to talk to them (Why were they in the building?) to confirm or deny such intent or purpose.

(C) I'm not sure exactly what the Georgia law is on citizen's arrests - if you see someone possibly committing a felony, does that give you legal justification for a citizen's arrest?

Ok, found it:

So, there's a chain of 'if's' here. If Arbery had intent to steal, then he was committing a felony. If he had committed a felony and was attempting to escape, then anyone could make a citizen's arrest.

And, to me, the "sticky" here is that a third party would be hard pressed to know that the 'trespasser' was, indeed, trespassing, as the alleged trespasser MAY have been a friend, a repair person, somebody there to assess the situation to give a bid for a job, obtained prior permission to look at the house under construction, etc....

So,.... it is a possibility that the McMichaels ticked the boxes in that chain. I'm doubtful that they can maintain that in court, however. I don't know what the law is on the use of force in a citizen's arrest.

(D) Also, on the younger McMichael holding a shotgun, it seems that he was following the law (unless he was in an "unauthorised area"). By law, if the gun is loaded, he must carry it openly and fully exposed.

Disclaimer for the race-baiters among us: None of the above is intended to make any comment on the rights and wrongs of the case, or to blame of justify anyone. My intent is to give relevant background information that may help us understand better what happened.

for the race-baiters among us: NONE of my interaction with Max in ANY WAY construes agreement with ANY of his points, and I'm obviously valiantly fighting him off, exposing his glaring deficiencies... heck, I don't even LIKE Max*!!!!



*ok, maybe a little

[MaxVel]

The problem maxvel is that in your mind a person cant be acting in a racist mannor unless they know that is what they are doing.

I'm saying it is possible to act and be motivated by racially motivated concepts and thoughts without being consciously aware of the fact that is what is happening.

That is a very easy charge to make, and difficult to defend against - how do you show that you're not doing something that you don't know that you're doing?

Therefore, by it's very nature, such a claim must put a heavy burden of proof on the accuser - they have to be able to show, in detail, and with solid evidence, just exactly what 'racially motivated concepts and thoughts' the person they are accusing has.

Otherwise, it's an easy cheap shot - accuse someone of some nebulous and undefined fault.

I utterly reject it as a charge, and I consider it dishonest and slimy to make such a charge without very substantial evidence indeed. Which you do not have.



Here's the definition of racism:

(1) a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
(2) a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
(3) hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

You get one chance to demonstrate, with solid evidence, exactly how I come under that definition. If you can't do that, then you show yourself to be irrational, dishonest, malicious, and not worthy of my time.

I belive you when you declare "I am not racist". I believe that to the degree you understand what being racist is, you try to avoid being that.

I'm talking about elements you either dont know about, or you dismiss because the source of the information is itself a source you are biased against e g. A researcher who is 'liberal' politically.

Then cite specifically which elements I don't know about, and explain how you know I don't know about them, with examples.

Cite precisely where I have dismissed any information because I am biased against the source. {This is utterly ironic - bald-faced gall - coming from the very poster who dismissed information about the case from the start of the thread}

And I have supported my claims. The simple fact the focus is on the victims flaws and not the shooters is evidence of racial bias.

Rubbish.

(a) People have talked about every aspect of the case. I have never tried to shut anyone up, or deny them the chance to talk about any aspect of what happened or the background. YOU are the one who does that. YOU - by your own standard - have racial bias.

(b) It's an argument from silence. We're not in some formal debate, where everyone is forced to answer every point made - it's a discussion board. People miss posts, come in and out of threads, come in half way through and don't read the whole thread, post off topic, post at different times - I'm in a different timezone from you - and so on. There are a myriad of possible reasons why people haven't brought up what YOU think is most important. Claiming 'It's racism!" is moronic, frankly.

(c) YOU set the adversarial tone early on, by attacking Littlejoe when he posted some information that he had heard. You did NOT address it, you attacked him for even posting it. And now you whine about people not posting things that you think they 'should'? Really? You expect me to take you seriously...?

(d) You made claims about me. What other posters may or may not have done is irrelevant to your despicable claims about me.

Especially given the absurdly aggressive actions taken by the shooters. The belief arbery was 'up to no good' expressed throughout the thread has no factual underpinnings.

Only in your mind, because you refuse to allow people to even discuss anything that might show something possibly negative about Arbery. You haven't addressed the facts, just said it's 'racist' for bringing any of them up.

It rather was the innate - and well documented - fact that in our culture a black man doing something unexplained is far more likely to be seen as suspicious than a white man.

Yeah, in your culture. No duh. Knowing that, why did Arbery run, making himself look even more suspicious? What a tragedy. On all sides.

[Cow Poke]

CP - please dont try to pretend your assessment of my credibility is objective.

Jim - PLEASE stop with this dumb "don't try to pretend" crap -- it really challenges your credibility.

I am usually right on these pages.

I think that's part of the problem, Jim -- you appear to think you're ALWAYS right, and you're the ONLY one who can be right.

nd I admit I'm wrong when i've been shown I'm wrong. It is not my credibility that is in question here.

Keep repeating that....

It is the fact you are offended by my assessment of this thread's content,

Nope. I don't get offended at your stuff at all, Jim, because... well, I have my reasons.

by my belief there are racial elements driving its content that might implicate you

I actually got a good laugh out of that one. Yeah, I'm a racist.
I choose to spend my weekdays in an environment where I'm overwhelmingly "the minority" because I hate people of color and am only there to make their lives miserable.

You're a riot, Jim.

[MaxVel]

And, to me, the "sticky" here is that a third party would be hard pressed to know that the 'trespasser' was, indeed, trespassing, as the alleged trespasser MAY have been a friend, a repair person, somebody there to assess the situation to give a bid for a job, obtained prior permission to look at the house under construction, etc....



for the race-baiters among us: NONE of my interaction with Max in ANY WAY construes agreement with ANY of his points, and I'm obviously valiantly fighting him off, exposing his glaring deficiencies... heck, I don't even LIKE Max*!!!!



*ok, maybe a little

I don't like you, either, bro.


And I, too, in no way agree, support, or endorse anything Cow Poke said, inferred, implied or hinted at, even if he himself didn't know he was doing it.


We have always been at war with Eastasia.

[Cow Poke]

That is a very easy charge to make, and difficult to defend against - ...

I think that's exactly why the extreme left loves to pull "the race card".
I suspect it's in the top 5 debate points.

AND, it makes them feel good about themselves without actually having to DO anything.

[oxmixmudd]

Jim - PLEASE stop with this dumb "don't try to pretend" crap -- it really challenges your credibility.



I think that's part of the problem, Jim -- you appear to think you're ALWAYS right, and you're the ONLY one who can be right.



Keep repeating that....



Nope. I don't get offended at your stuff at all, Jim, because... well, I have my reasons.



I actually got a good laugh out of that one. Yeah, I'm a racist.
I choose to spend my weekdays in an environment where I'm overwhelmingly "the minority" because I hate people of color and am only there to make their lives miserable.

You're a riot, Jim.

You do the denial bait and switch quite well CP.

[Cow Poke]

You do the denial bait and switch quite well CP.

If you had any credibility, my feelings might be hurt.

[oxmixmudd]

That is a very easy charge to make, and difficult to defend against - how do you show that you're not doing something that you don't know that you're doing?

Therefore, by it's very nature, such a claim must put a heavy burden of proof on the accuser - they have to be able to show, in detail, and with solid evidence, just exactly what 'racially motivated concepts and thoughts' the person they are accusing has.

Otherwise, it's an easy cheap shot - accuse someone of some nebulous and undefined fault.

I utterly reject it as a charge, and I consider it dishonest and slimy to make such a charge without very substantial evidence indeed. Which you do not have.



Here's the definition of racism:



You get one chance to demonstrate, with solid evidence, exactly how I come under that definition. If you can't do that, then you show yourself to be irrational, dishonest, malicious, and not worthy of my time.




Then cite specifically which elements I don't know about, and explain how you know I don't know about them, with examples.

Cite precisely where I have dismissed any information because I am biased against the source. {This is utterly ironic - bald-faced gall - coming from the very poster who dismissed information about the case from the start of the thread}




Rubbish.

(a) People have talked about every aspect of the case. I have never tried to shut anyone up, or deny them the chance to talk about any aspect of what happened or the background. YOU are the one who does that. YOU - by your own standard - have racial bias.

(b) It's an argument from silence. We're not in some formal debate, where everyone is forced to answer every point made - it's a discussion board. People miss posts, come in and out of threads, come in half way through and don't read the whole thread, post off topic, post at different times - I'm in a different timezone from you - and so on. There are a myriad of possible reasons why people haven't brought up what YOU think is most important. Claiming 'It's racism!" is moronic, frankly.

(c) YOU set the adversarial tone early on, by attacking Littlejoe when he posted some information that he had heard. You did NOT address it, you attacked him for even posting it. And now you whine about people not posting things that you think they 'should'? Really? You expect me to take you seriously...?

(d) You made claims about me. What other posters may or may not have done is irrelevant to your despicable claims about me.




Only in your mind, because you refuse to allow people to even discuss anything that might show something possibly negative about Arbery. You haven't addressed the facts, just said it's 'racist' for bringing any of them up.



Yeah, in your culture. No duh. Knowing that, why did Arbery run, making himself look even more suspicious? What a tragedy. On all sides.

Not going long with you right now max. The issue is 'are there elements of culture that can be racist or encourage racism without the privileged in that culture being aware that is what those elements are'.

If so, then it is important to try to find them and eliminate them.

But as long as people refuse to accept the possibility such can exist, they can not be fixed.

It is my belief that a non trivial percentage of what perpetuates the vast racial disparities that exist in this country are these covert racist elements.

I pointed out one of them. A black man doing something unknown is more likely to be viewed with suspicion than a white man. It is documented, it is ingrained in our culture.

It has consequences in that it causes a higher percentage of otherwise innocent black people to be subjected to calls to the police, or direct hostile actions by citizens.

But there are literally hundreds of things like that in our culture and our society that continue and perpetuate the racial divide.

[MaxVel]

I think that's exactly why the extreme left loves to pull "the race card".
I suspect it's in the top 5 debate points.

AND, it makes them feel good about themselves without actually having to DO anything.

Yep.

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

I (since oxmixmudd thinks speculation about people's motives is fair and reasonable) think that's why oxmismudd does it, although he doesn't himself realise that is why. He has a subconscious need to validate his own pet beliefs, and since he can't do that by arguing the data, he has to do it by thinking that 'he knows' the real, hidden, evil, reasons why people don't think exactly like he does.

Sad.

On a brighter note, this prompted me to think back over the people I've worked directly with in the last 20 years. I've worked in small teams of about 5. I count 21 nationalities, but I'm possibly forgetting a few - I think there was a guy from Malta who didn't stay too long.

Got on fine with all of them, except for a couple of Americans (both white, for oxmixmudd) who were kind of selfish and not very team-focussed.

My favourite and most talented / hard-working work colleagues: Phillipino, Singaporean, English, Iranian, Dominican Republic, Dutch, and an American woman.

I'm an ethnic minority where I live (less than 0.2 %), I speak three languages (including the local one) fluently. My wife is from a different ethnic group and skin colour than me. I live in a very different culture to my mother one. A racist culture - an easy and sure laugh is to suggest that someone comes from a certain neighbouring country... the automatic assumption is that means they are a dumb hick. A culture that lumps all Caucasians in as being 'the same' by virtue of skin colour. A culture that has a commonly used term for foreigners that has connections to a racist insult (comparing foreigners to excrement).

Yeah, sure, I'm a racist, I just don't know it.

[oxmixmudd]

... You're a riot, Jim.

Btw, when I was in high school I had a friend of mine that went on to be a preacher laugh at me and tell me I was daft when I tried to explain black holes to him.

I am no stranger to mentalities that reject scientifically established truth and principles because they dont make sense to them. The issue of culturally ingrained racism us well known and well researched CP. The question is can you get past the liberal/conservative spin on it and look into it objectively.

[MaxVel]

Not going long with you right now max. The issue is 'are there elements of culture that can be racist or encourage racism without the privileged in that culture being aware that is what those elements are'.

If so, then it is important to try to find them and eliminate them.

But as long as people refuse to accept the possibility such can exist, they can not be fixed.

It is my belief that a non trivial percentage of what perpetuates the vast racial disparities that exist in this country are these covert racist elements.

I pointed out one of them. A black man doing something unknown is more likely to be viewed with suspicion than a white man. It is documented, it is ingrained in our culture.

It has consequences in that it causes a higher percentage of otherwise innocent black people to be subjected to calls to the police, or direct hostile actions by citizens.

But there are literally hundreds of things like that in our culture and our society that continue and perpetuate the racial divide.

You've dodged the issue - your malicious claims about me. I don't care whatever else you have to say, you had the chance to make some attempt to support your vile slander. You haven't.

Trying to change the topic is not OK.



You throw out these accusations, aimed at people, but dressed up as general comments about 'posters'. That's cowardly.

You can't support your accusations about me, I've given you several opportunities to do so. But you haven't retracted them, or apologised, or made any concession that you might have got carried away.


You don't get to just pretend you didn't say what you did. You don't get to just walk away without addressing just how offensive what you said was.

You've lost my respect. You need to get help. You're acting in a pathetic, cowardly, and shameful way. It's not a pleasant sight.

[MaxVel]

Btw, when I was in high school I had a friend of mine that went on to be a preacher laugh at me and tell me I was daft when I tried to explain black holes to him.

I am no stranger to mentalities that reject scientifically established truth and principles because they dont make sense to them. The issue of culturally ingrained racism us well known and well researched CP. The question is can you get past the liberal/conservative spin on it and look into it objectively.

Why should he, when you clearly can't get past your own blind spots? CP does more to actually help black people in one week than you've done in all your time slandering others here on TWeb. You ought to be embarrassed. Shameless.

[Cow Poke]

Yeah, sure, I'm a racist, I just don't know it.

I must hereby end all association with you for fear of being PROVEN a racist!
I shall hang my head in shame and report immediately to the Multicultural Sensitivity Training Room.

[Cow Poke]

Btw, when I was in high school I had a friend of mine that went on to be a preacher laugh at me and tell me I was daft when I tried to explain black holes to him....

Perhaps your manner in "explaining things" was as screwy back then as it is now?