Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

Ahmaud Arbery Trial (US)

  • 12-05-2021 3:01pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 787 ✭✭✭ hawley


    Three Georgia men pleaded not guilty to federal hate crime charges Tuesday in the death of Ahmaud Arbery, a 25-year-old Black man who was chased and shot while jogging near his home, according to online court documents.

    Greg McMichael, a 65-year-old former police officer; Travis McMichael, Greg McMichael's 35-year-old son; and William "Roddie" Bryan appeared in front of U.S. Magistrate Judge Benjamin Cheesbro for their first court appearance since they were indicted on the federal charges.

    Mod Snip - do not quote full articles

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/5034210001

    If proven, it would be frightening to see a former police officer behave in such a brutal manner. There seems to be an underlying hatred for minorities in swathes of the U.S.


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,404 ✭✭✭ Potatoeman


    I wouldn’t link Brennan Taylor with the rest, her boyfriend opened fire on police when they preformed a ‘no knock’ warrant. I’d have concerns about the policy but it’s a very different case.


  • Registered Users Posts: 65,252 ✭✭✭✭ Overheal


    It comes as a relief to the senses that those 3 are in jail for hate crimes and civil rights abuses. Georgia has also repealed the citizens arrest law used by them to justify the murder, which dates back to the civil war/slavery era. This hopefully puts an end to the handwringing about the case or people trying to assign guilt to a corpse.
    Potatoeman wrote: »
    I wouldn’t link Brennan Taylor with the rest, her boyfriend opened fire on police when they preformed a ‘no knock’ warrant. I’d have concerns about the policy but it’s a very different case.

    Regarding the summer of 2020, the cases are all strung together because they were in attention, one after the other. People were furious about Breonna but there was no video, so doubts; with Ahmaud there was the citizens arrest excuse, the hand wringing about trespassing on a neighbors property, and doubts and anger; and then Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in broad daylight in front of more than a dozen bystanders who recorded the whole thing. Fuel, Oxygen, and Spark.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,630 ✭✭✭✭ snoopsheep


    Ill keep an eye out for them, thanks OP


  • Registered Users Posts: 65,252 ✭✭✭✭ Overheal


    One day after Travis McMichael, Gregory McMichael and William “Roddie” Bryan appeared in federal court and pleaded not guilty to hate crime charges in Ahmaud Arbery’s death, a Georgia judge is hearing the murder defendants’ pre-trial arguments in favor of dredging up Arbery’s past — including guilty pleas — and entering that into evidence.

    The defendants, accused of murdering Arbery on February 23, 2020 in a street in the Satilla Shores neighborhood of Brunswick, Georgia, purportedly believed Arbery was a burglary suspect. Video that went public well after the incident showed the McMichaels and their truck in the middle of a road Arbery was running on. Bryan was in a different vehicle and apparently following Arbery. He recorded the moment Arbery was shot and killed.

    The defense wants a jury to learn that Arbery had a gun conviction in 2013, an attempted shoplifting conviction in 2017, and that Arbery was on probation at the time he was shot.

    The hearing, anticipated to continue into Thursday, is also expected to include a push from the prosecution to enter the defendants’ texts and social media posts into evidence. The prosecution would do this in an effort to point to racial animus as a motivation. For instance, it has been alleged that Travis McMichael called Arbery a “****ing n*****” after the shooting and before the police arrived.

    The defendants have pleaded not guilty to the murder charges. A trial date has not yet been set.


    https://lawandcrime.com/live-trials/live-trials-current/ahmaud-arbery/watch-live-murder-defendants-try-to-enter-ahmaud-arberys-past-guilty-pleas-into-evidence/

    I'll be fascinated to learn how they think the victims criminal history is relevant: their defense will argue that they conducted a citizens arrest for trespassing, that should be the end of their story. Admitting that they had some prior knowledge of who he was and chose to chase him down and shoot him etc would seem even more detrimental to their case, imo.


  • Registered Users Posts: 65,252 ✭✭✭✭ Overheal


    Court Livestream: https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=3977808662305191&ref=watch_permalink

    The defense is currently establishing its case to the judge that Arbery's prior interactions with police be admitted into evidence. Prosecution objecting to the relevancy, the prior interactions don't involve the 3 defendants, they involve police interactions from 3+ years prior to the incident in question.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 787 ✭✭✭ hawley


    Overheal wrote: »
    Court Livestream: https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=3977808662305191&ref=watch_permalink

    The defense is currently establishing its case to the judge that Arbery's prior interactions with police be admitted into evidence. Prosecution objecting to the relevancy, the prior interactions don't involve the 3 defendants, they involve police interactions from 3+ years prior to the incident in question.
    If he has any previous convictions, it should be inadmissible as evidence. It doesn't have any relevance to this case. It's important to see their hate crime laws being updated.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,167 ✭✭✭✭ Donald Trump


    Overheal wrote: »

    The hearing, anticipated to continue into Thursday, is also expected to include a push from the prosecution to enter the defendants’ texts and social media posts into evidence. The prosecution would do this in an effort to point to racial animus as a motivation. For instance, it has been alleged that Travis McMichael called Arbery a “****ing n*****” after the shooting and before the police arrived.

    [...]

    I'll be fascinated to learn how they think the victims criminal history is relevant: their defense will argue that they conducted a citizens arrest for trespassing, that should be the end of their story. Admitting that they had some prior knowledge of who he was and chose to chase him down and shoot him etc would seem even more detrimental to their case, imo.


    Do you think that texts sent after the murder should also not be allowed? Or if one of the shooters was previously the grandmaster of the local klan, that that wouldn't be relevant?'




    I think they should be allowed to give your man's history. It doesn't seem very much to me. I don't think it would affect me on a jury. Let them give it and let the jury ignore it if they want to


  • Registered Users Posts: 787 ✭✭✭ hawley


    Do you think that texts sent after the murder should also not be allowed? Or if one of the shooters was previously the grandmaster of the local klan, that that wouldn't be relevant?'




    I think they should be allowed to give your man's history. It doesn't seem very much to me. I don't think it would affect me on a jury. Let them give it and let the jury ignore it if they want to
    Another thing emerging from the case now is Arbery's history of mental illness. Even if it is undisclosed, surely members of the jury would be aware of it being in the public arena for discussion.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,514 ✭✭✭✭ Muahahaha


    Would say this trial will mainly hinge on the video evidence and it is pretty stark. They hunted him up and down the road with two SUVs for several minutes with their guns ready to go and eventually killed him.

    Full video of his final moments and a breakdown of what happened is here
    https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000007142853/ahmaud-arbery-video-911-georgia.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 787 ✭✭✭ hawley


    Defense attorneys are trying to prevent jail phone calls from being used as evidence in the murder trial of Greg and Travis McMichael, who are charged with killing Ahmaud Arbery. On Thursday (May 13), the father and son’s attorneys asked a judge to exclude thousands of hours of phone calls, once of which hears Greg calling their pursuit and killing of Arbery a “good deed.”
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.revolt.tv/platform/amp/2021/5/14/22436235/ahmaud-arbery-trial-good-deed
    If it's true that Greg McMichael described the killing of Ahmaud as a good deed, hopefully it will be able to be used as evidence in court. The CCTV will also be of critical importance. This case has echoes of the Jim Crow era, three white men chasing down an African American and killing him.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 65,252 ✭✭✭✭ Overheal


    hawley wrote: »
    Defense attorneys are trying to prevent jail phone calls from being used as evidence in the murder trial of Greg and Travis McMichael, who are charged with killing Ahmaud Arbery. On Thursday (May 13), the father and son’s attorneys asked a judge to exclude thousands of hours of phone calls, once of which hears Greg calling their pursuit and killing of Arbery a “good deed.”
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.revolt.tv/platform/amp/2021/5/14/22436235/ahmaud-arbery-trial-good-deed
    If it's true that Greg McMichael described the killing of Ahmaud as a good deed, hopefully it will be able to be used as evidence in court. The CCTV will also be of critical importance. This case has echoes of the Jim Crow era, three white men chasing down an African American and killing him.

    I suspect they won't win that motion, that seems like smoking gun proof of intent.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,514 ✭✭✭✭ Muahahaha


    Well if the prison phonecall is allowed into evidence and they get found guilty then it removes their ability to claim they were remorseful for the murder.


  • Registered Users Posts: 65,252 ✭✭✭✭ Overheal


    Exactly it should be relevant to sentencing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 65,252 ✭✭✭✭ Overheal


    Judge finds that Arbery's prior history bears no relevance to trial, none of the accused had any knowledge of it.





  • Registered Users Posts: 10,412 ✭✭✭✭ Faugheen


    Good.

    And the person who spoke about texts sent after the killing, if they are about the incident in question then why shouldn't they be used?



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,924 ✭✭✭✭ osarusan


    It's good that more and more people are thick enough to film themselves doing stuff like this.

    Until the video surfaced this had been pretty easily swept under the rug by local prosecutors. I'd imagine quite a lot of stuff might come out about them also.

    Given the publicity, most people will know about Arbery's previous brushes with the law now, but even Derek Chauvin's lawyer wasn't willing to use George Floyd's (much worse) criminal history in court, as it's pretty much a 'well my client f**ked up but it turns out he was a scumbag anyway' defence.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,793 ✭✭✭ BattleCorp


    It's not a smoking gun because it doesn't prove intent. It proves that they aren't remorseful.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,167 ✭✭✭✭ Donald Trump



    They could have been in denial or trying to justify their actions post hoc. Or it could have been bravado in the face of likely bad consequences for them. I don't see how the later calls are relevant. It would be different of course if they said something like "yeah we chased him down and killed him and we've been trying to get him for weeks".



  • Registered Users Posts: 65,252 ✭✭✭✭ Overheal


    The DA was just indicted by a grand jury :o


    Before she eventually recused herself, the DA, who has known Greg McMichael for decades, had directed that Greg and Travis McMichael were not to be arrested. This came after the officers who responded to the scene and completed the initial investigation came to her office with enough cause to have them arrested. She also failed to disclose key conversations she had prior about the case with the prosecutor she in turn recommended take over for her upon her recusal.

    She's been charged with violating her oath of office and obstruction of a police officer.




  • Registered Users Posts: 30,264 ✭✭✭✭ Gatling


    What a total wagon



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,412 ✭✭✭✭ Faugheen


    What an absolute disgrace.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,018 ✭✭✭ Carfacemandog


    Intent is already proven. The murderers literally videotaped it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,793 ✭✭✭ BattleCorp


    I'm not denying that. I'm just commenting that phone calls after the event don't prove intent.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,587 ✭✭✭ CrabRevolution


    I remember the original thread on this, and a few posters were going with that argument; "They're not guilty, because due to their actions the entire town can now sleep easy at night".

    Another bizarre one was the claim that there wasn't even a case to answer, since all it takes to nullify a murder/manslaughter charge was to say you stood your ground, even if you were the one who approached the victim and instigated the confrontation.



Advertisement