Two Weapons, a Chase, a Killing and No Charges: A 25-year-old man running through a Georgia neighborhood ended up dead

Here's the training I understand: Every cop says, "Don't pursue. Call us and we will take care of it." Hmmmm. Well, when the shoe is on the other foot. . . . .WSP. ;). His stupid prize is going to be time in jail.
If he's lucky, his prize will be time in jail. I made an interesting discovery the other day: under Georgia law, felony murder can get you the death penalty. I think it unlikely that this trial will result in a death sentence - life imprisonment seems more likely - but the possibility exists.
 
Just started watching this trial. WTF is the defense attorney talking about?

Edit: By the way. Let's just get my bias in this matter on the table. I think the three of them are guilty as hell.
 
Defense attorney questioning investigator about interview with dumbass #3 that occurred after the investigator spoke with same defense attorney about it. Weak sauce.
 
Just started watching this trial. WTF is the defense attorney talking about?

Edit: By the way. Let's just get my bias in this matter on the table. I think the three of them are guilty as hell.

When the evidence is so horribly against you, throw crap against the wall.

The father and son are guilty as heck, their actions were atrocious. The other, roddie, is less clear based on the evidence I know. I also think life in prison for his part is excessive. He was stupid but the father and son are the cause of the murder. Perfect example of why you shouldn’t get involved in stuff which doesn’t involve you.
 
I'm not watching this one, and I don't feel a need to follow it. No outcome will really shock me, honestly, given the time and place. And given some of the comments here in this very thread, which have reinforced for me just how unreasonable some people are.

I've made my bias clear, but who knows what a jury down there will say? I just think a kid's dead who shouldn't be dead, and three lives are now ruined as a result of senseless idiotry. Not much to be happy about in this case.
 
Nate the Lawyer (the podcaster in the Rikieta Law coverage in the Rittenhouse case) is talking about this case right now. Apparently the State's case is shitting the bed to some degree.
 
Who's been following this case?

What are they all being charged with? I haven't been following and don't recall what they are alleging the third guy (the non McMichael) to have done.

How has the trial been going?
 
Who's been following this case?

What are they all being charged with? I haven't been following and don't recall what they are alleging the third guy (the non McMichael) to have done.

How has the trial been going?

Off the top of my head, murder, felony murder, kidnapping and I believe battery with a deadly weapon (truck).
 
Who's been following this case?

What are they all being charged with? I haven't been following and don't recall what they are alleging the third guy (the non McMichael) to have done.

How has the trial been going?

Looked it up. If convicted, they’re all likely going away for life.

Gregory McMichael, Travis McMichael, and William “Roddie” Bryan all face nine charges, which include malice murder, four counts of felony murder, two counts of aggravated assault, false imprisonment, and criminal attempt to commit false imprisonment.
 
Found the indictments.


I find it ridiculous that all three are being charged with all of them.

Count 1: Malice murder. Only one of them shot him, correct? So the other two could not have killed him with malice, seeing they didn't kill him at all.

Counts 2-5: Felony murder. All counts here are the same charge, just with four different alleged felonies. The first two, aggravated assault (one with the shotgun, the second with the trucks). Again, only one of them had a shotgun, so how did the other two assault him with a gun they never had? Only two people were driving the trucks, so how do the other guy assault him with a truck not under his control? The third for false imprisonment and fourth for attempted false imprisonment.

Count 6: Aggravated assault to wit a shotgun.
Count 7: Aggravated assault to wit the trucks. Same here. They all didn't have shotguns and drive trucks so only the one's that did should be facing said charge.

Count 8: False imprisonment. Seems like a stretch. I mean they must be saying by killing him he was falsely imprisoned? At most, the one guy who shot him was also sort of wrestling with him. That's the closest thing to this and even that seems absurd. I don't know how this is appropriate.
Count 9: Attempted false imprisonment. Could apply to all three.

Seems like a case of throwing the book at them to see what sticks.

Counts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9 could apply to Travis McMichael.
Counts 5 and 9 could apply to Greg McMichael.
Counts 3, 5, 7 and 9 could apply to William Bryan.

But in total, that's 14 bogus charges.
 
Found the indictments.


I find it ridiculous that all three are being charged with all of them.

Count 1: Malice murder. Only one of them shot him, correct? So the other two could not have killed him with malice, seeing they didn't kill him at all.

Counts 2-5: Felony murder. All counts here are the same charge, just with four different alleged felonies. The first two, aggravated assault (one with the shotgun, the second with the trucks). Again, only one of them had a shotgun, so how did the other two assault him with a gun they never had? Only two people were driving the trucks, so how do the other guy assault him with a truck not under his control? The third for false imprisonment and fourth for attempted false imprisonment.

Count 6: Aggravated assault to wit a shotgun.
Count 7: Aggravated assault to wit the trucks. Same here. They all didn't have shotguns and drive trucks so only the one's that did should be facing said charge.

Count 8: False imprisonment. Seems like a stretch. I mean they must be saying by killing him he was falsely imprisoned? At most, the one guy who shot him was also sort of wrestling with him. That's the closest thing to this and even that seems absurd. I don't know how this is appropriate.
Count 9: Attempted false imprisonment. Could apply to all three.

Seems like a case of throwing the book at them to see what sticks.

Counts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9 could apply to Travis McMichael.
Counts 5 and 9 could apply to Greg McMichael.
Counts 3, 5, 7 and 9 could apply to William Bryan.

But in total, that's 14 bogus charges.

They’re saying they acted as a group so all are responsible for the consequences but you know that. I agree the son who confronted Arbery with the shotgun and fired the shots is the most culpable. I doubt the other 2 had the slightest idea the dumb son would kill someone over that.

I think the false imprisonment is because of their use of the pickup trucks to restrict Arbery movements. They repeatedly blocked his path. the murder counts are the ballgame though.

a) A person commits the offense of false imprisonment when, in violation of the personal liberty of another, he arrests, confines, or detains such person without legal authority.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of false imprisonment shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years.
 
They certain attempted to falsely imprison him it seemed, but I think it’s still a stretch to say they succeeded, you know, apart from the shooting him dead bit.
 
They certain attempted to falsely imprison him it seemed, but I think it’s still a stretch to say they succeeded, you know, apart from the shooting him dead bit.

There’s zero chance they’re acquitted, best hope is a hung jury. I’m not risking the rest of my life in prison for a possible theft of an under construction house that isn’t mine or my family’s.

The father and son seem so stupid, they probably don’t regret anything they did. I think the other guy is regretful but regret isn’t going to help him much
 
I think they’ll be convicted too, but I still don’t think because someone is guilty of one thing it’s okay to charge them with a bunch of other stuff as well, just because you can.

In this case, is there any discernible difference between convictions of attempted false imprisonment and felony murder to with the attempted false imprisonment; and convictions of false imprisonment and felony murder to wit said false imprisonment?
 
Yeah. I get why prosecutors overcharge, but I don't like it either.

What's worse: prosecutors overcharging from the start, or tacking on "lesser included offenses" at the end of the case? I'm not sure. I think, either way, it's just the way the system has evolved to give the State more than one bite at the apple, thus infringing on the rights of the accused.

But hey. That's just me. I'm one of those guys who's in favor of Blackstone's formulation. YMMV, and if you're a statist YM definitely will V.
 
When the evidence is so horribly against you, throw crap against the wall.

The father and son are guilty as heck, their actions were atrocious. The other, roddie, is less clear based on the evidence I know. I also think life in prison for his part is excessive. He was stupid but the father and son are the cause of the murder. Perfect example of why you shouldn’t get involved in stuff which doesn’t involve you.

I haven't seen it, but is the Defense in this case somehow related by blood to the prosecutor in the Rittenhouse case? ;)

Found the indictments.


I find it ridiculous that all three are being charged with all of them.

Count 1: Malice murder. Only one of them shot him, correct? So the other two could not have killed him with malice, seeing they didn't kill him at all.

Counts 2-5: Felony murder. All counts here are the same charge, just with four different alleged felonies. The first two, aggravated assault (one with the shotgun, the second with the trucks). Again, only one of them had a shotgun, so how did the other two assault him with a gun they never had? Only two people were driving the trucks, so how do the other guy assault him with a truck not under his control? The third for false imprisonment and fourth for attempted false imprisonment.

Count 6: Aggravated assault to wit a shotgun.
Count 7: Aggravated assault to wit the trucks. Same here. They all didn't have shotguns and drive trucks so only the one's that did should be facing said charge.

Count 8: False imprisonment. Seems like a stretch. I mean they must be saying by killing him he was falsely imprisoned? At most, the one guy who shot him was also sort of wrestling with him. That's the closest thing to this and even that seems absurd. I don't know how this is appropriate.
Count 9: Attempted false imprisonment. Could apply to all three.

Seems like a case of throwing the book at them to see what sticks.

Counts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9 could apply to Travis McMichael.
Counts 5 and 9 could apply to Greg McMichael.
Counts 3, 5, 7 and 9 could apply to William Bryan.

But in total, that's 14 bogus charges.

Remember the Dawwwwwg duh Bounnnyhunnah did serious time because he was the driver in a (bank?) robbery that led to a death. I guess this guy had nothing to trade in order to drop some charges.
 
Yeah. I get why prosecutors overcharge, but I don't like it either.

What's worse: prosecutors overcharging from the start, or tacking on "lesser included offenses" at the end of the case? I'm not sure. I think, either way, it's just the way the system has evolved to give the State more than one bite at the apple, thus infringing on the rights of the accused.

But hey. That's just me. I'm one of those guys who's in favor of Blackstone's formulation. YMMV, and if you're a statist YM definitely will V.
The thing about lesser included offenses is if the primary offense contains 5 elements and the lesser included offense contains the first three elements and the first three elements were proven a conviction on that lesser included charge is appropriate since it does not change the burden of proof or the defenses theory of the case.

This case is different when on one hand the state is arguing an act was intentional but then if that is not accepted claim the act was reckless. When the theories of the case are in opposition to each other the lesser included offense should not be allowed.

Edit: Wrong case, wrong thread. I was referring to the Rittenhouse case. But still, the thought process for appropriateness of lesser included charges applies.
 


I don’t think this guy has watched much of the trial, the civil arrest claim by the mcmichaels was extremely weak and Travis, the son was terrible on the stand. His answers were very damaging to the defense

The jury deliberated for 6 hours today and at 6pm they told the judge they were close to a verdict. That’s absolutely not good news for the defense. There is zero chance they get acquitted, their own hope is a hung jury. If they are close to a decision on day one, it’s to convict.

I think the father and son are toast. I do think Bryan has a chance to escape the murder charges and only get convicted of the assault charges. I don’t like the murder charge for Bryan, he was a bit player and really had no idea what he was involved it. I don’t think being stupid in a situation like this warrants a life in prison sentence
 
The jury deliberated for 6 hours today and at 6pm they told the judge they were close to a verdict. That’s absolutely not good news for the defense. There is zero chance they get acquitted, their own hope is a hung jury. If they are close to a decision on day one, it’s to convict.
Time of deliberation means nothing either way.
5DD3B489-62DF-477D-8C6B-DE24BA950A15.jpeg
 
With the fact set of this case, anything quick will be a conviction. The sons testimony undercut their entire claim of citizens arrest or self defense.
Thats what everyone said in the OJ case. Like was shown in the 10 examples above I posted read nothing into the time the jury puts in, it means nothing. I wouldn’t bet the farm either way in this one. Both sides have potential problems. Some like you stated for the defense and some for the state. I won’t be shocked by either outcome. Did they have “reasonable suspicion” He was out robbing places? Sounds like it. Did the kid go for the guys gun? Sure looks like it on the video. He could’ve taken a right to run away, He chose to turn left and take on the individual holding the gun and then tried to take it from him. I was taking all bets on rittenhouse, not here.
 
Thats what everyone said in the OJ case. Like was shown in the 10 examples above I posted read nothing into the time the jury puts in, it means nothing. I wouldn’t bet the farm either way in this one. Both sides have potential problems. Some like you stated for the defense and some for the state. I won’t be shocked by either outcome. Did they have “reasonable suspicion” He was out robbing places? Sounds like it. Did the kid go for the guys gun? Sure looks like it on the video. He could’ve taken a right to run away, He chose to turn left and take on the individual holding the gun and then tried to take it from him. I was taking all bets on rittenhouse, not here.

GA law for citizens arrest (since repealed) required the person to have the crime take place in your presence or have firsthand knowledge (see it on a video surveillance in real time) I’ve watched some of the trial, I don’t think they come close to meeting the requirements from what I’ve seen in the testimony and they talked quite a bit afterwards to the cops on scene and a good amount of what they said then were lies. Arbery also never took anything from that house under construction, that day or any other day. At the most he was trespassing but there were no signs and he had never been trespassed from there

The OJ jury is unique, those twelve jurors combined didn’t have a 100 brain cells. This case is also fairly simple. There is no question of who killed whom and there are a lot of statements there 3 made and the end is video taped. I honestly think the defendants lawyers expect convictions and hope to win in the appellate courts.
 
Thats what everyone said in the OJ case. Like was shown in the 10 examples above I posted read nothing into the time the jury puts in, it means nothing. I wouldn’t bet the farm either way in this one. Both sides have potential problems. Some like you stated for the defense and some for the state. I won’t be shocked by either outcome. Did they have “reasonable suspicion” He was out robbing places? Sounds like it. Did the kid go for the guys gun? Sure looks like it on the video. He could’ve taken a right to run away, He chose to turn left and take on the individual holding the gun and then tried to take it from him. I was taking all bets on rittenhouse, not here.

Again - have we forgotten the OJ case completely???

How we FELT about the OJ case and how we EXPECTED it to go were 2 different things. Once you got to "The glove don't fit" it was all over. The prosecution never offered any explanation of why the gloves didn't fit. . . after they decided TO MAKE HIM TRY THEM ON! It was over right there. There was just too much reasonable doubt with Furhman and the whole bungled-evidence thing and the glove and an all-star defense team versus 2 meh prosecutors.

I was at the pro shop at Easton Country Club when the verdict came in waiting to tee off. Everyone stopped and watched. No one was surprised. Disappointed. Not surprised.
 
The OJ jury is unique, those twelve jurors combined didn’t have a 100 brain cells. This case is also fairly simple. There is no question of who killed whom and there are a lot of statements there 3 made and the end is video taped. I honestly think the defendants lawyers expect convictions and hope to win in the appellate courts.

Not sure if serious, OJs case was so bad that I would have dismissed even though I knew he did it. The state failed in a pretty horrendous way. They failed in such a way that anyone
who wasn't retarded would have given him "reasonable doubt".
 
Back
Top Bottom