For WHAT pray tell? Speaking the truth? 🤪 Go have yourself a pity party with your buddy, _glaciers.
Despite all of the county's cringe-worthy shenanigans in this case, it's gratifying to see that justice prevailed.
Last edited:
Vigilante Justice on Trial in Georgia
- Thread starter DaShuckster
- Start date
Despite all of the county's cringe-worthy shenanigans in this case, it's gratifying to see that justice prevailed.
They "brought in ministers" to intimidate the jury. Who says something like that? Why can't some people just admit that the justice system worked and not have to try to find a scandal where it doesn't exist?
The DEFENSE did during the trial.
Which is why our Vice President called them out for it.
THe justice system worked precisely because people called bull shit on this and protested. I mean these guys werent even arrested for 3 months and multiple attorneys originally decided no charges were warranted. Plus, you have another attorney ( who wasnt on the case) who was friends with the guys , who was charged with obstruction for trying to help them cover it up. THe Georgia Bureau of investigation eventually took over the investigation. If it was left to the local justice system, they never would have been arrested. Justice did prevail, but it very easily gone the other way if the video were not released and there wasnt public pressure.
So how did this happen? I've given up following these things.
EXACTLY!!!!!! THE DEFENSE twice called for mistrials arguing that 'Black preachers' in the courtroom audience were intended by the Prosecution to intimidate the jury. It was a bullsh!t claim and a race-baiting tactic to put it mildly.
But did you call out the defense for it? No, you called out the Vice President for...gasp!....acknowledging the defense lawyer's race-baiting tactic.
Basically the video was released to the public (to a local radio station, not in an official capacity), so the Georgia Bureau of investigation took over the investigation. If this was left to the local prosecutors, they would have never been charged. So it worked out, but the fact there were so many hoops to jump through for a pretty obvious case IMO, is quite telling.
The county's original DA has been charged for her role in stifling the investigation and will go to trial early next year.
Just an FYI, Arbury's mother was informed by a deputy sheriff that her son was killed during the commission of a crime. If not for a diligent investigative reporter and the leak of the videotape, the McMichaels and the local county officials would have literally gotten away with murder.
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth now. Did the defense bring in the ministers, or did the prosecution?
Exactly. The outcome eventually was correct, but the entire process still shows major flaws in our system.
The ONLY reason these guys are finally on trial is because they idiotically released their video of them murdering him and people demanded justice after the original DA declined to press charges for three months.
Truly insane this happened in 2021
WTF are you talking about?
Mrs Arbury -- you know, the mother of the victim -- brought in the ministers with her. When did the appearance of Black preachers in a courtroom become a crime?
I never said it was. Maybe I'm just not understanding what it is that you're saying.
I have not followed this case real closely, but from what I have heard and read, they got the verdict they should have gotten, with a mostly white jury.
Hmmmm... Surely this hasn't happened all throughout history? If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it...
If McMichael had been wearing a badge, he'd likely have been found not guilty by the jury. That's your Youtuber's brilliant 'counter' argument? 🤪
There were a lot of aspects of the case that he covered in that clip that are interesting.
Yeah, you would. This case was about as close to an open-and-shut murder conviction as it gets. To spin it into anything else says more about the spinner's agenda than it does with the evidence.
It's not about spin, it's about looking at the legal aspects of what the justice system takes into account.
I said from the beginning that they should go to prison. Somehow that isn't good enough?
Something that I don't think you realize about yourself: you are the modern day version of a member of the lynch mobs from decades ago. You hear a story, whether it is completely factual or not, but if it meets your confirmation bias you immediately want "justice" imposed on them. No discussion, no investigation, just action.
You are actually accusing me of being a member of a modern-day lynch mob???!? Even for you, this is a new low.
Talk about someone who posts here with zero self-awareness.
Just curious, what part of the evidence wasn't 'completely factual' and led to my 'confirmation bias'?
- Was it a fact that the McMichaels and their good ole boy neighbor chased Arbury through the neighborhood in their pick-up trucks?
- Was it a fact that this so-called 'thief' didn't take a damn thing from the home construction site he visited?
- Was it a fact our Bubba Patrol got a tad-bit testy when this 'suspicious' character REFUSED TO OBEY THEM AND STOP when they pulled up in their trucks and demanded Arbury do so?
- Was it a fact that Bubba Junior left his truck with his shotgun and proceeded to shoot this Black guy they'd been chasing dead when he turned and approached in an attempt to get Bubba's gun away from him?
- Was it a fact these yahoos weren't charged for months -- until the video of the murder was leaked and went national?
- Was it a fact Arbury's mother was told by police her son died during the 'commission of a crime'?
I suppose we could ask the rest of the board. But I could have sworn we've been discussing this damn case for the past two years.
Did you ever consider the possibility that Arbery may have been casing the house for a later robbery?
Exactly. You didn't consider it because you didn't want to consider it. It is as simple as hearing what you want to believe and then wanting justice based on your preconceived bias, regardless of any other explanation. Just like the Covington kid, who you still maintain is guilty of taunting the Indian guy that is a known liar, and in spite of all of the video evidence to the contrary. You passed judgment immediately, just like the lynch mobs used to do.
Hmmm it’s almost as if our designed system of Justice which involves checks and balances worked out just fine then?
Odd, considering that “literally” every aspect of the American Justice system is systemically racist, and stuff.
It all worked out in the end?
I suppose as long as you ignore the fact that it took a leaked viral video of the murder before the public outrage which followed FINALLY spurred the Georgia Bureau of Investigation to step in from the county's do-nothing DA and do-nothing police who appeared to be content to let the McMichaels get away with murder.
If you're going to play this game, you probably should pick a better example. Racism "literally" reeks through this entire case.
How can you be this stupid? The 3 men in question are now guilty of murder and headed to jail; this was possible since States have checks on local prosecutors if they think that they aren’t pursuing cases correctly, or if they think there is corruption or bias involved at the local level. That is literally what happened here.
If “literally” the entire Justice system was “literally systematically racist” then these guys wouldn’t be guilty. There wouldn’t even be a State level special prosecutor to hold local officials accountable. Get it yet?
At least in this case you didn’t have to personally lie and distort facts to justify your viewpoint like you did in the Covington and KR cases
Before the video, was there any evidence to charge them? Nope, but that goes unnoticed in your racist fantasy land.
To buy your argument, you'd have to believe the viral video of the murder had no impact on the case.
No evidence? What do you call a dead body on the street and a shotgun belonging to Travis McMichael?
And the testimony of 3 people saying that arbery was the aggressor. Don't be so naive.
Any police officer who wasn't a fellow racist good-ole-boy who came on to the scene that day might have asked a few follow-up questions like:
-- What did you see this man steal?
-- Was he an eminent danger? Why did you chase him down with your pick-up trucks?
-- Travis, why did you leave your truck carrying a loaded shotgun?
LMAO. Yeah, I'm SO naive' for thinking there was some evidence that a modern-day lynching had occurred instead of gobbling up the McMichaels' bullsh!t without a second thought.
I know it and you know it, but the officers had no evidence other than the statements given. You don't charge someone without evidence.
Holy "Confirmation Bias," Batman!
If this was a White jogger murdered in a Black neighborhood by three Black men, are you going to trot out that line?
WTF? A dead body on the street with a bigass shotgun hole in his side and a smoking shotgun aren't evidence?
Yes. It wasnt about lack of evidence, it was about corruption.
First of all, I don't immediately look at things through the lens of race like you do. Secondly, that isn't confirmation bias. It's a question that people WITHOUT confirmation bias would ask.
It is a question that has nothing to do with anything. You cant essentially "convict" someone of a crime that never happened.
