Arbery Case Outcome

[SolidSnake]

A Crime is a crime, history of hate crime will show majority of those convicted of hate crime are whites against blacks. does that say, as you pointed out about history, whites are racist most of the time and not other races?
BTW, I'm in the oppressed class (not white).
I've been on this site for a long time, longer than most! No trolling here!

A second trial is not needed IMHO

It's happening whether you or anyone here think it should. The complaining about it when it doesn't effect you in any real way makes it look like you got nothing better to complain about in the moment. I suggest you find more constructive things to occupy your time with.

 

[slimmer13]

Some motivations are more egregious than others I'm fine with hate and racism being called out separately as a crime within itself.

That was covered already above but to recap they used racist epitaphs to the police when they arrived but also it was shown there were other people who trespassed at the house under construction that were not black yet they chose Arbury. The evidence is overwhelming here.

It wasn't any of the convicted three's house that was under construction, so I doubt they had access to the surveillance footage. That said, who knows if they noticed anyone else poking around the place. Maybe Arbery was the first.

I have no problem with having a conversation with an out of place individual. I've asked people parked on my private Rd that don't live there if they need help with anything. If nothing else than to let them know I saw them. What they did wrong is impede Arbery's free movement, and it is hard to articulate fear of grievous bodily harm or death (or whatever the wording is in GA) when there was three of them.

I also would have been fine with the other two getting lesser sentences.

So to me the only evidence of a "hate crime" is an investigator for the GBI said one of the convicted told him that one of the others said a slur after the shooting. Not exactly overwhelming to me, but like I said we all have different thresholds for throwing the R word around.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Race was at the heart of this prosecution; if Ahmaud Arbery had been white, this case would never have gone to trial.

 

[bbbass]

The purpose is to administer Justice.
That has already been done, so why double jeopardize these people and try them on their intent and feelings behind the actual crime?

Those things would/should be taken into consideration in the kind of charges, level of charges, and esp in sentencing. That's why we have things like "aggravated" assault, and murder with special circumstances (as in super heinous crimes that warrant the death penalty).

 

[SolidSnake]

I didn't realize so many members had their Juris Doctor degree, impressive. Such a deep wealth of learned knowledge on law.

 

[slimmer13]

I didn't realize so many members had their Juris Doctor degree, impressive. Such a deep wealth of learned knowledge on law.

Familiar pattern. Just joins and immediately starts talking down to everyone.

Catch you on your next name.

 

[titsonritz]

All I've got to say is:
1. They got what they deserved.
2. Hate crimes are B.S. and should be on the books. Assault is assault, murder is murder, punish the crime regardless of motive.

 

[mhayd93]

I didn't realize so many members had their Juris Doctor degree, impressive. Such a deep wealth of learned knowledge on law.

I am seeing people being critical of a particular aspect of the legal system; no one is attempting to portray themselves as legal experts on either side of the debate here.

If people debating/critiquing the legal system in America gets under your skin so easily, you can always not view this thread. Taking sarcastic digs at people when you only recently just joined probably isn't the greatest idea though!

 

[SolidSnake]

I am seeing people being critical of a particular aspect of the legal system; no one is attempting to portray themselves as legal experts on either side of the debate here.

If people debating/critiquing the legal system in America gets under your skin so easily, you can always not view this thread. Taking sarcastic digs at people when you only recently just joined probably isn't the greatest idea though!

I see a lot of people not understanding how the law works or being dense as to why a hate crime trial on a federal level is needed. A lot of complaining about hate crime laws with very little practical understanding of them.

 

[Cavedweller]

I see a lot of people not understanding how the law works or being dense as to why a hate crime trial on a federal level is needed. A lot of complaining about hate crime laws with very little practical understanding of them.

So enlighten us, please.

Also, if you wouldn't mind, opine on this: 2 lives brutally taken, the killers get relatively light sentences. Is this crime less heinous because the killers and the victims have the same skin color?

Portland men who shot and killed pregnant woman during burglary sentenced to only 7.5 and 10 years in prison, respectively

27-year-old De’Anthony Simmons and 29-year-old Kelani Brown pleaded guilty to charges of Manslaughter in the Second Degree with a Firearm and Burglary First Degree.

thepostmillennial.com

 

[mhayd93]

I see a lot of people not understanding how the law works or being dense as to why a hate crime trial on a federal level is needed. A lot of complaining about hate crime laws with very little practical understanding of them.

Ah, so you are the resident legal expert? Please enlighten us and explain why our opinion is wrong that hate crimes are an unnecessary part of the legal system.

Remember, no one here has argued that charging people with hate crimes is not a thing; only that they are superfluous and function as thought policing.

You can disagree with that sentiment (as many others already have) without being condescending.

 

[SolidSnake]

So enlighten us, please.

Also, if you wouldn't mind, opine on this: 2 lives brutally taken, the killers get relatively light sentences. Is this crime less heinous because the killers and the victims have the same skin color?

Portland men who shot and killed pregnant woman during burglary sentenced to only 7.5 and 10 years in prison, respectively

27-year-old De’Anthony Simmons and 29-year-old Kelani Brown pleaded guilty to charges of Manslaughter in the Second Degree with a Firearm and Burglary First Degree.

thepostmillennial.com

I don't give advice on something I don't have all the pertinent facts on. Show me all the facts and I'd be happy to oblige.

 

[Cavedweller]

I don't give advice on something I don't have all the pertinent facts on. Show me all the facts and I'd be happy to oblige.

You could try reading the article.

 

[SolidSnake]

You could try reading the article.

Which is not all the facts… I've read it. It's not like a case file. It's a summary.

 

[Cavedweller]

Which is not all the facts… I've read it. It's not like a case file. It's a summary.

So, you read the case file on the Arbery case then? You had no trouble opining on that. Or did you get "all the facts" elsewhere?

 

[SolidSnake]

So, you read the case file on the Arbery case then? You had no trouble opining on that. Or did you get "all the facts" elsewhere?

Nope and I'm not giving any hot take advice like I do know.

 

[Cavedweller]

Nope and I'm not giving any hot take advice like I do know.

You stated that a federal trial was necessary, even in light of the life + years with no possibililty of parole sentences handed down by the state. You seem to believe that that crime was particularly egregious. I am only asking you to explain why you think those sentences are justified, and another trial is needed, when in the other case the perpetrators get off lightly. How is the taking of a life more egregious in one case than the other? Can you not justify your opinions?

 

[SolidSnake]

You stated that a federal trial was necessary, even in light of the life + years with no possibililty of parole sentences handed down by the state. You seem to believe that that crime was particularly egregious. I am only asking you to explain why you think those sentences are justified, and another trial is needed, when in the other case the perpetrators get off lightly. How is the taking of a life more egregious in one case than the other? Can you not justify your opinions?

@Hueco gave the best response. So I'll refer you to his previously in the thread. My answer would be exactly the same.

 

[Cavedweller]

@Hueco gave the best response. So I'll refer you to his previously in the thread. My answer would be exactly the same.

Would you mind citing a specific post #? Thanks.

 

[Cavedweller]

I've read it. It's not like a case file. It's a summary.

You must be a speed reader.

Would you mind citing a specific post #? Thanks.

@SolidSnake i guess you don't want to. So I must assume that you feel emotions are more important than actions, since you don't want to address the disparity in the sentences between the 2 aforementioned crimes.