Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are missing the obvious. The cop knows that there is no trespassing violation and nothing that a Cop could do. And I doubt very much that a cop could claim to be an agent of the owner thus barring a person from further entry into the property. So they used McMichael to get the client an acceptable agent to chase interlopers off. Practical policing.
There certainly is such a thing as illegal trespass in Georgia law.
Quote:
I'll bite. Why on earth would a DA investigator ever arrest anyone?
If the DA wants some one arrested they would send the local police to do the dirty work.
Ask them why they authorize DA investigators to make arrests.
I think it is clear he didn't want trespass on his property based on his actions; installing cameras, reporting prior trespass, being in communication with police about it, calling the neighbour to investigate this final trespass when he became aware of it.
Given the death threats he has received, I would also be separating myself from anything to do with the the McMichaels. Which he is rightly and justifiably doing.
Which makes it really odd why he lets his attorney keep putting him back in the spotlight with the information about the text from the cop referring him to McMichaels for help as well as the belief that Arbery was going into the property to get water.
Why keep going on national news rather than just go silent and turn that info over to the GBI and new DA?
I think you are reading it wrong. The citizen can act if he or she saw an offense of has immediate knowledge of one. But further they can arrest on suspicion if it is a felony they suspect. The McMichaels can claim either. Suspected burglary can be a felony.
If they saw Arbery running on the street how is that enough to be a suspected burglary?
(a) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that person.
(b) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority:
(1) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose;
(2) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant that such entry is forbidden; or
(3) Remains upon the land or premises of another person or within the vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant to depart.
(c) For the purposes of subsection (b) of this Code section, permission to enter or invitation to enter given by a minor who is or is not present on or in the property of the minor's parent or guardian is not sufficient to allow lawful entry of another person upon the land, premises, vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft owned or rightfully occupied by such minor's parent or guardian if such parent or guardian has previously given notice that such entry is forbidden or notice to depart.
(d) A person who commits the offense of criminal trespass shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
(e) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally defaces, mutilates, or defiles any grave marker, monument, or memorial to one or more deceased persons who served in the military service of this state, the United States of America or any of the states thereof, or the Confederate States of America or any of the states thereof, or a monument, plaque, marker, or memorial which is dedicated to, honors, or recounts the military service of any past or present military personnel of this state, the United States of America or any of the states thereof, or the Confederate States of America or any of the states thereof if such grave marker, monument, memorial, plaque, or marker is privately owned or located on land which is privately owned.
Just to clarify, if you do something that is a bad idea, and you point a gun at someone, no other facts about the situation are relevant, and your actions are necessarily illegal?
Doesn’t matter. They caused a confrontation and he had a right to self defense.
It’s pretty clear why you won’t answer the question. Answering it honestly will completely destroy one of the main false narratives of this entire discussion.
If you disagree, have a crack at answering the question. It’s an easy one, and I’m sure can do it.
Whatever......the discussion over pass/passed is ridiculous and long past the point of being interesting to anyone.
They were not going to let him go any further past them than he already had which was a few inches at best.
Travis ran around to the front of the truck.
What do you think Travis was planning to do?
It’s only lost interest to those, such as yourself, who were completely wrong about it.
You're assuming it's true despite no evidence of it because you need to paint a narrative to defend the guy who decided to assault a group of armed men. You are desperate to excuse that behavior for whatever reason. I'm surprised you haven't accused the men of hurling racial slurs yet, maybe you are saving that for later.
Point is, there's no evidence that any firearm was pointed at Arbery till he decided to charge....in fact, if they were already pointing firearms at him when he made that decision, it wouldn't have taken 3 shots to drop him. The guy with the shotgun was clearly unprepared to shoot when the charge began, and as a result he missed entirely with the first shot despite the fact he was using a shotgun. Had he been aiming the shotgun from the start, Arbery wouldn't have even made it to him.
They brought firearms for self defense, and it was proven that they needed them since the thief indeed did attack them. You can invent any crazy scenario you want, but in the end if your fantasies aren't supported by fact they aren't going to get you anywhere.
With all of the false narratives going on in this thread, one would expect them to have the McMichaels wearing white hoods, waving a Rebel flag, blasting Dixie over a loudspeaker, running a pack of German Shepherds, and spraying Arbery with a portable water canon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
