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

This.

Look, again, twist yourselves in knots all you want. There was no arrest associated with the events shown on that bodycam, meaning... no PC. No real reason to do anything to him. They were hassling him. That's all. And it's repugnant.

PC can exist and they can choose not to arrest, but that still gives consent to detain or search. Im not twisted up about anything... Im explaining potential application of laws in street.
 
This.

Look, again, twist yourselves in knots all you want. There was no arrest associated with the events shown on that bodycam, meaning... no PC. No real reason to do anything to him. They were hassling him. That's all. And it's repugnant.

Don't get me wrong, I'm with you, I think cops should really leave people alone unless they actually witness a real crime taking place. I've just been stating fact, that The Guardian edited out Ahmed being aggressive.
 
Courts have backed 'high crime area' contributing to developing probable cause. Like it or not, if they had pc to arrest for 'trespassing' the had pc to go in car. He can deny it or get hostile (like when he puffed up to cop and launched towards him.)

He wasn't trespassing and he wasn't arrested.


A 'stop' is defined as a seizure. They seized him. Police are allowed to use facts of that particular seizure to determine 'operation' in some states. Lets not be dense and assume that his car teleported there.

What did they seize him for him the first place? He didn't know his license was suspended before hand. He obviously wasn't even interested in that. He was however very interested in trying to search his car.


In any case, I don't see how a guy who had probably driven with a suspended license in 2017 has anything to do with a some guys chasing him down in trucks and shooting him to death in 2020.
 
He wasn't trespassing and he wasn't arrested.




What did they seize him for him the first place? He didn't know his license was suspended before hand. He obviously wasn't even interested in that. He was however very interested in trying to search his car.


In any case, I don't see how a guy who had probably driven with a suspended license in 2017 has anything to do with a some guys chasing him down in trucks and shooting him to death in 2020.

His aggression speaks to his character, which is fair game.
 
He wasn't trespassing and he wasn't arrested.




What did they seize him for him the first place? He didn't know his license was suspended before hand. He obviously wasn't even interested in that. He was however very interested in trying to search his car.


In any case, I don't see how a guy who had probably driven with a suspended license in 2017 has anything to do with a some guys chasing him down in trucks and shooting him to death in 2020.

I barely watched video because I dont care. Im telling you guys basics of patrol procedure
 
I'm not saying the initial stop was valid or anything. I'm just saying the video posted by the guardian doesn't show him being aggressive. And he was very aggressive in this video.

Also he had a suspended license, if you listened to the dispatcher.

Yeah. I'd have been aggressive at "can I see your ID?" "No." That's where I'd get aggressive.

And none of this has ANY bearing on the incident that led to the guy's death. He could have been a complete tool and a serial killer who rapes 5yo boys with cocaine and that STILL doesn't justify what the Toolio's did the day in question.
 
It’s procedure to seize people who’ve done nothing illegal?

Its procedure to investigate an incident where a crime has, is, or about to be comitted. Its the definition of reasonable suspicion in Ma. I have no idea what laws are in THEIR state, nor what facts the officers had on hand. Take that however you wish.

The problem is, as it usually is common that if the police don't have enough to arrest you, only a r***** would then behave in a way that gave them the ability to...... which he did. Classic JBT on their part, and dumbass fell for it.
 
His aggression speaks to his character, which is fair game.

The sort of "aggression" against unwarranted police harassment, similar to what I read all day from NES chest-thumpers?

A citizen being detained for no good reason probably has a right to be outraged.
 
All I see here is a guy being effed with.
Yeah, it's not an indictment of Arbery, but it does make the local police look bad.

The irony of Glynn County is that it's the home to GLYNCO, aka the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. At least during my time at FLETC, there were multiple examples of county and local police being used as How To Not Do Things.
 
The sort of "aggression" against unwarranted police harassment, similar to what I read all day from NES chest-thumpers?

A citizen being detained for no good reason probably has a right to be outraged.

Grouping everyone together to form an entity to argue against
 
I see a cop attempt to tase a guy for no reason after another cop tries to come up with a way to search his car. All because "he might be up to something".

So I'm not sure what that video is suppose to prove. He may or may not have been smoking weed and gets annoyed when cops try and tase him? Monster!
The cops are racist.

They feared for their lives because the black man was so angry that the "veins in his chest were pulsating and throbbing".

That is a pre attack indicator.

Only black men have veins like that which pulsate and throb.

Clearly the cops are treating AA differently than a white man.

The size and brute strength of AA indicates a disparity of force in light of him trying to steal the shotgun.

That can be used in court to justify shooting him as he tried to steal the shotgun.
 
I never said that.

You faulted his aggression.

I said a citizen being unreasonably detained has a right to be outraged.

Should he have been supremely pissed that the state was abusing his rights, or not?

You also know very little of his "character." You're judging from what you've seen of him in two specific situations when he was unreasonably confronted with force, or at least coercion. The way a person acts in extremis says very little about their overall personality.
 
You faulted his aggression.

I said a citizen being unreasonably detained has a right to be outraged.

Should he have been supremely pissed that the state was abusing his rights, or not?

You also know very little of his "character." You're judging from what you've seen of him in two specific situations when he was unreasonably confronted with force, or at least coercion. The way a person acts in extremis says very little about their overall personality.

I know what I saw, and that's an idiot trying to rush a cop. And the way people act under stress says EVERYTHING about their personality.
 
I know what I saw, and that's an idiot trying to rush a cop. And the way people act under stress says EVERYTHING about their personality.

You see an idiot trying to rush a cop.

I see an idiot trying to taze a citizen with no reason, while being abetted by another idiot and only restrained by a coercive authority figure and the presence of cameras.

This says everything about the way you and I see the world.
 
You see an idiot trying to rush a cop.

I see an idiot trying to taze a citizen with no reason, while being abetted by another idiot and only restrained by a coercive authority figure and the presence of cameras.

This says everything about the way you and I see the world.

You don't know me. Attribute whatever else you want to what I said, your lack of comprehension makes this conversation boring. I'm done with you.
 
This has devolved into irrelevant BS perceptions about people on two side of the debate club. (middle school)
The self-appointed neighborhood watch made clear and conscious choices, to act in a series of deliberate steps, that ended in the death of a human being.
To what criminal degree of sentence they will suffer, is for the people of Georgia to decide, either in State or Federal proceedings. Then there is a good chance for the civil action by the victims family afterwards. Arguing back and forth won't change these facts.
 
I see an idiot trying to taze a citizen with no reason, while being abetted by another idiot and only restrained by a coercive authority figure and the presence of cameras.
That was almost comical. The idiot with the Taser charged in, ordered him to get his hand out of his pocket, and get his hands up. Which AA did, and was standing perfectly still when the idiot tried firing his Taser, which sparked harmlessly in stun/drive mode. And they stood there staring at each other for about five seconds, motionless, with the Taser crackling away. lol

And then the idiot literally talked to AA like a dog: "DOWN!" "STAY!"
 
...which is completely irrelevant to the case at hand.

What about the case of the father who killed the pedophile and confessed on FB? Do the prior actions of the pedo mean anything? At the time the father killed the pedo he wasn't actually diddling any kids. He was just a convicted pedo with kids toys in his yard and staring at a group of children. Since prior behavior means nothing, does that mean the father should get the death penalty?

The public is getting Trayvonned hard on this one. I'm sure its coincidence a 3 month old shooting is now everywhere while the Obama/Clinton machine is getting caught spying on Trump. Covid-19 and another Trayvonesque story, the distractions are all going according to plan...
 
Back
Top Bottom