Ahmaud Arbery sentencing.

[Muhammed]

Well, I'[ve never seen anyone else's neck turn red, have you?

Besides, it's no different than when one negro calls another negro "N***A", right?

Here, educate yourself, pinhead: Redneck - Wikipedia

It figures that you're a wikidiot.

 

[mudwhistle]

Think he'll get raped by large black men?

Wow....that is sooooooo funny!!!

 

[gipper]

Well, you don't. I notice you seem perfectly satisfied in your ignorance and haven't lifted a finger to go read up.

STFU!!!

 

[liarintheWH]

Well, I'[ve never seen anyone else's neck turn red, have you?

Besides, it's no different than when one negro calls another negro "N***A", right?

Here, educate yourself, pinhead: Redneck - Wikipedia

^
Fucking Liberals, so corny.

 

[pknopp]

Did the police find hand prints belonging to Arbery on both trucks? The police said they did. The Defense did not challenge this assertion.

You should have watched the trial. It would make you sound far less dumb.

As I said earlier. And several times since. Every decision they made was the dumb choice.

Imagine being such an ass that you cause your son to serve the rest of his life in prison.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

He was committing a crime.

Being black in a majority white neighborhood ain't a fucking crime, dickhead. Explain yourself.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Being black in a majority white neighborhood ain't a fucking crime

It is to the racist right.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

It is to the racist right.

I'd like them to plainly admit it. But they won't. Because magaturds blow goats.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

unfortunately its also how people are convicted or not in certain cases. racism.

yeah retard, I went to school.

Well it's not readily apparent that you have such as what's unfortunate about people being convicted of racism if that's what they were involved in?

 

[Canon Shooter]

It figures that you're a wikidiot.

And, yet, you provide nothing to counter it...

 

[beagle9]

Is that what shooters who kill innocent unarmed people get now Otis?

Pffft, you want to really scratch your head, then go look at the episode's of "I survived" that have been playing on YouTube. Check out some of those sentences after the facts. Talk about crazy. I'm surprised there aren't more judges canned for the idiocy they display when it comes to doling out justice properly. Some of those episodes are so heinous, and then at the end the perp gets 10 to 15 or might have a hung jury that leads to a mistrial, and on an on it all goes. That's some amazing stuff on those shows, otherwise if the stories are true, and the sentencing is real.

Justice in this country becoming political is doing a huge disservice to everyone involved.

 

[MINDLESS]

Three Georgia men sentenced to life in prison for 'chilling' Arbery murder

(Reuters) -A Georgia judge sentenced Travis McMichael and his father Gregory McMichael on Friday to life in prison without the possibility of parole for what he called the "chilling" 2020 murder of Ahmaud Arbery, a Black man running through their mostly white neighborhood in the southern U.S...

www.yahoo.com

How long will each get?

Ahmaud Arbery will get 3 years in prison.​

 

[gipper]

Oops, someone doesn't understand the law.

Yeah because you know, like uh like like uh the law is always right and never changes.

Ststists always expose themselves as fools.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Is this thread a race-bait post because of how racists are on this post -- voluntarily spouting off their delusional insecurity-driven racist opinions???

 

[beagle9]

People are racist. That will never change. You’re case in point. But the system isn’t racist.

Good point that racist are found in every racial make up, and yes the system (((if))) controlled properly by laws and racially blind justice (otherwise that recognizes this problem), is supposed to mitigate the effects of these case's becoming swayed by racist attitude's or intimidation once the case enters the court room.

It can easily become however, that what begins to take place in society, can next become a strong tool that can be taken into a court room in which might sway the proceedings into a situation of favor instead of justice. Now how does society get away or stay away from such a thing as racial or social justice being played out against evidence ? Not sure other than to do away with the old jury selection system, and actually make the juries job's permanent employment. This way jurors can be trained in law, and become vital asset's in the upholding of blind justice, and law and order. They need to be trained professionals in the realm of law, justice, and in keeping order in evidence near and dear to them.

 

[beagle9]

It isn't. I called it from the first instance. The inbred rednecks are guilty.

Yep, guilty of going about something in a very stupid way, where as let it be a lesson to anyone else thinking about attempting to apprehend a person before the law arrives, and especially in the Manor in which they chose to do so. Talk about stupid, that was stupid. It just didn't have to go that way. Call the police, follow at a safe distance, and in many cases the 9-11 operator will stay on the line in order to direct police as they make their way to the scene based off of the real time information being given them. It's not good to be dumb in life, because it leads to bad things sometimes. Case in point.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Good point that racist are found in every racial make up, and yes the system (((if))) controlled properly by laws and racially blind justice (otherwise that recognizes this problem), is supposed to mitigate the effects of these case's becoming swayed by racist attitude's or intimidation once the case enters the court room.

It can easily become however, that what begins to take place in society, can next become a strong tool that can be taken into a court room in which might sway the proceedings into a situation of favor instead of justice. Now how does society get away or stay away from such a thing as racial or social justice being played out against evidence ? Not sure other than to do away with the old jury selection system, and actually make the juries job's permanent employment. This way jurors can be trained in law, and become vital asset's in the upholding of blind justice, and law and order. They need to be trained professionals in the realm of law, justice, and in keeping order in evidence near and dear to them.

"They need to be trained professionals in the realm of law, justice, and in keeping order in evidence near and dear to them."

Why do you folks pretend to care about "professionals in the realm of law and justice" ??

We all know that once those "professionally trained jurors" deliberate in a way that you don't like -- you will claim they are all just part of the evil nefarious Deep State cabal....

 

[beagle9]

it's being a vigilante which is not legal so...

You dont get to act as judge jury and executioner because you think some dude is stealing stuff from a house.

Hmm, the only way that your last words would be completely true, is if they would have shot Arbery from a fixed location, otherwise not approach him in the street, and then attempt to apprehend or detain him for the law if that was their plan of action correct ?? Was their intent ever agreed upon or discussed openly in the trial in which finally gave a conclusion of or on their intent ? What was their intent finally agreed upon in the conclusion of and upon the trial ?

 

[beagle9]

"They need to be trained professionals in the realm of law, justice, and in keeping order in evidence near and dear to them."

Why do you folks pretend to care about "professionals in the realm of law and justice" ??

We all know that once those "professionally trained jurors" deliberate in a way that you don't like -- you will claim they are all just part of the evil nefarious Deep State cabal....

With the amount of court cases being deliberated in America every day, I think that you are way off point to think that somehow white's or black's see the system as being systemically racist as a whole..... Otherwise I think for the most part the court's do get it right, but these high profile cases can make the people pause sometimes, and it can make the people begin to think in way's that maybe the system needs improved upon, otherwise in order to seal the cracks up better.

 

[SavannahMann]

Good point that racist are found in every racial make up, and yes the system (((if))) controlled properly by laws and racially blind justice (otherwise that recognizes this problem), is supposed to mitigate the effects of these case's becoming swayed by racist attitude's or intimidation once the case enters the court room.

It can easily become however, that what begins to take place in society, can next become a strong tool that can be taken into a court room in which might sway the proceedings into a situation of favor instead of justice. Now how does society get away or stay away from such a thing as racial or social justice being played out against evidence ? Not sure other than to do away with the old jury selection system, and actually make the juries job's permanent employment. This way jurors can be trained in law, and become vital asset's in the upholding of blind justice, and law and order. They need to be trained professionals in the realm of law, justice, and in keeping order in evidence near and dear to them.

Preposterous.

Up until the Jury everyone involved is trained in the law, and paid to do the job. Think about it for a moment. The Police are trained and charged by law to enforce the law. Yet they lie, plant evidence, hide or destroy evidence, and violate the Constitutional Rights of the citizenry pretty regularly.

Their actions are reviewed by other cops, and then by the District Attorney. Look at every exoneration. In every one the DA knew there were problems and continued with the Prosecution. Why? It’s his job to prosecute. His job, he is paid to prosecute people, even if he has doubts. It’s not up to him to decide the guy is guilty, it’s the job of the Jury, and his job is to fool the jury.

The Judge is trained and experienced in the law. Paid to insure that the law is followed. Additionally he is responsible for explaining the law to the Jury.

Yet Judges are overturned, or overruled all the time. It is why we have an appeals process. To weigh the issues in a more controlled setting. Then if we don’t like the decision on the appeals, we can go higher. Eventually appealing to the Supreme Court, and the legal experts trained and all that to be there.

Yet those experts, trained and experienced, came up with the asinine doctrine of Qualified Immunity. A doctrine that has shielded corrupt and bad cops for going on three generations.

And if you go with professional jurors, the next question is what happens to the Reasonable Person doctrine? We judge many events based upon what a reasonable person would think in that situation. Is it reasonable to do this, or not?

Take a case from our recent history. Michael Drejka shot and killed a man over a dispute revolving around a handicapped parking place. The Defense and many others argued it was self defense. The prosecution and the police argued that it was murder. The Jury watched the tapes, listened to the testimony, and debated for a while before deciding it was not reasonable to shoot McGlockton. There was a pause between the pulling of the pistol, when McGlockton took a step back, and the shooting.

The Jury decided it was not reasonable for Drejka to still believe he was in danger, sufficient to justify the use of deadly force.

Drejka was sent to Prison over the howls of outrage by some. What would a professional Jury think? What would be their connection to the Reasonable Person argument? They would be professionals wouldn’t they?

One of the problems facing our society is corruption in Police. Cops on the take. Cops who are bribed. Lawyers and Judges are also susceptible. But wouldn’t the professional juror also be susceptible?

Now, someone would have to assign Jurors to the cases. That assignment could be random, picking twelve names out of a hat out of a pool of one hundred. Or more likely it would be a supervisor assigning jurors. Kick a little money towards him and get a jury who is made up of people more likely to be favorable towards your case. Or talk to him and get a jury to decide that the accused is guilty.

But let me ask you this. Why do you believe we need this professional jury pool? What decisions have been outrageous? What decisions have made it apparent to you that the average individual is incapable of understanding what the case was really about? Was it this case? The case of the killing of Arbery? Or was it Chauvin? What case helped you decide we need professional jurors?