Ex Cop and son kill unarmed black man jogging

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yes, that’s what I said - it was a real possibility here, and a higher risk than it would be in other jurisdictions.

As an illustration of my reasoning, in most places, there’s a 5% chance of a shitty racist holdout juror. In Glynn county, there’s a 25% chance. In both cases, the odds are in favor of conviction. But in Glynn county, the odds of a mistrial are 5X the odds elsewhere. And….a 25% chance of a shitty outcome makes me nervous. You’d be a shitload more nervous going into a surgery with a 25% chance of killing you than you would for a surgery with a 5% chance of killing you (I sure your as hell would be).

Just because you successfully wake up from both doesn’t mean that the 25% surgery wasn’t risky and nerve-wracking, and it sure doesn’t mean that the risks of both surgeries were equal because hey, you woke up, what’s the big deal?

The patient pulled through in Glynn county. I’m happy. But that’s no excuse to ignore the high risk points that occurred at multiple places in this procedure.

OK counselor, you do some deep ass thinking out on that ledge.  A lot of it is depressing emotional BS, but it's entertaining.  Your hands have got to be chapped from all the hand wringing you engaged in the entire thread.  For the record, I thought they were going to be found guilty, but only because they had the video. 

[Brisketexan 104746]

OK counselor, you do some deep ass thinking out on that ledge.  A lot of it is depressing emotional BS, but it's entertaining.  Your hands have got to be chapped from all the hand wringing you engaged in the entire thread.  For the record, I thought they were going to be found guilty, but only because they had the video. 

My job literally involves picking jurors in different jurisdictions and figuring the odds based on my jury pool. I’d be an idiot not to honestly evaluate when my jury pool has higher odds of going against me. It’s just cold reality. It’s not my emotions at all. It’s THEIRS that matter. That’s my whole point. I’m just handicapping the horses based on the evidence of their proclivities. That doesn’t mean that the 10-1 horse can’t win; it just means that the likelihood is greater that the 3-1 horse will win.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

My job literally involves picking jurors in different jurisdictions and figuring the odds based on my jury pool. I’d be an idiot not to honestly evaluate when my jury pool has higher odds of going against me. It’s just cold reality. It’s not my emotions at all. It’s THEIRS that matter. That’s my whole point. I’m just handicapping the horses based on the evidence of their proclivities. That doesn’t mean that the 10-1 horse can’t win; it just means that the likelihood is greater that the 3-1 horse will win.

This is not about picking jurors, this was about a comment made by a poster that applied to you, and little hobbsie got his dick twisted that one of his gang got "picked on".   Go fry a turkey....

[South Austin 52171]

Happy Thanksgiving!

[EuroHorn 3204]

Some people just can’t be happy…

[Brisketexan 104746]

Some people just can’t be happy…

I’m happy the patient pulled through surgery and is gonna be ok.

I’m not happy about the events that put the patient in surgery.

When the DA hangs, I’ll feel a bit better. When we build in better safeguards that make cover ups like this much less likely, I’ll be happy.

I’m happy the patient is going to make it. I’m still pissed about the shit that put him in the hospital. I have high standards, I guess.

[Brisketexan 104746]

Some people just can’t be happy…

I’m happy the patient pulled through surgery and is gonna be ok.

I’m not happy about the events that put the patient in surgery.

When the DA hangs, I’ll feel a bit better. When we build in better safeguards that make cover ups like this much less likely, I’ll be happy.

I’m happy the patient is going to make it. I’m still pissed about the shit that put him in the hospital. I have high standards, I guess.

[Cajun 11675]

2 hours ago, Armybrat said:

Wilco has had a couple of those in recent decades… along with a couple of sheriffs.

They’re everywhere.

There are good DAs, but this isn’t a “bad” apple issue.  Far too many are corrupt, agenda-driven losers who have been given too much power and immunity.

More of them need to be incarcerated like the bitch in Georgia.  If there is prosecutorial misconduct proven, then they need to face the exact same sentence they were seeking to slap on the defendant through their lies and deceit.  Same with lying cops.

Edited November 25, 2021 by Cajun

[Brisketexan 104746]

They’re everywhere.
There are good DAs, but this isn’t a “bad” apple issue.  Far too many are corrupt, agenda-driven losers who have been given far too much power and immunity.

This. And understand, the corruption and abuse of the power of the occur often carries with it the particular afflictions of the locality. Some are crooked in that they protect local powerful families. Others are crooked because of mob/criminal ties. A LOT are crooked because of systemic racism woven into the system and particularly their local community.

I can deal with incompetent DAs, or disagreements as to their judgment and greater strategic decisions. That’s life, that’s law. What should be unacceptable is corrupt actions of favoritism/discrimination squarely at odds with their oath and duty to see “that justice is done.”

[0xdeadbeef 1627]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

And the fact that there was video - and it took LEAKING that video and the public outrage it caused to get justice, is it’s own problem.

But for horrific videos, these three guys are still walking free. And Derek Chauvin is walking free. One of the pastors working with the Arbery family made a strong point that while we’re making steps towards equal justice, there’s a problem when the burden of proof when it comes to murder of a black man requires video of the crime being committed. That’s a high fucking burden. And for every case like these with video, how many dozens more have no video, so the murderer walks?

This affair demonstrates that yes, the system can function when white power structures victimize black people, but ALL the pieces have to fall perfectly into place for it to do so.
 

 

That's not a racial issue.   People who commit crimes often lie about the circumstances.  If it's a he-said, she-said type deal, it's really hard to get to the truth, especially when there are no other witnesses. 

[Wulaw Horn 18985]

3 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Brisket was right. It would have taken only one juror. But, we won the lottery and didn't have that juror on the panel. Just because the coin came up heads doesn't mean that it didn't have an equal chance of coming of tails. 

That’s misleading though and y’all know it. All “1 juror” would have done was make the state and defense have the trial all over again. That would suck, of course, but it’s not like it would be a walk. 

[Brisketexan 104746]

That’s misleading though and y’all know it. All “1 juror” would have done was make the state and defense have the trial all over again. That would suck, of course, but it’s not like it would be a walk. 

When your jury pool sucks, your chances of getting a good verdict go down. Had this resulted in a mistrial, the smart percentage play would have been to let the murderers plead down to a lesser charge. Which would not have been justice. You know that.

[aggie08 21445]

1 hour ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

That's not a racial issue.   People who commit crimes often lie about the circumstances.  If it's a he-said, she-said type deal, it's really hard to get to the truth, especially when there are no other witnesses. 

It's a racial issue that, for hundreds of years, it has been relatively easy to convince a few jurors via he-said, she-said that a black man walking around in a white neighborhood was "up to no good" without conclusive video evidence otherwise.

[Wulaw Horn 18985]

28 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

When your jury pool sucks, your chances of getting a good verdict go down. Had this resulted in a mistrial, the smart percentage play would have been to let the murderers plead down to a lesser charge. Which would not have been justice. You know that.

No way. They would have absolutely retried that case at least once if it hung 11-1 to convict. It would have sucked but no way those guys weren’t getting tried again with those optics. 

[Brisketexan 104746]

It's a racial issue that, for hundreds of years, it has been relatively easy to convince a few jurors via he-said, she-said that a black man walking around in a white neighborhood was "up to no good" without conclusive video evidence otherwise.

This. Juries employ personal “benefit of the doubt,” which carries with it one’s inherent biases. The DA was even worse in that regard here. And the defense played to them at trial. Who you gonna believe, these fine upstanding citizens who look like you, or that…you know…that type?

That is still built into our systems - in some places, much worse than others. This is our concern, dude.

[Armybrat 40755]

2 hours ago, South Austin said:

Happy Thanksgiving!

Lotta turkey talk here already.

[mchookem 16246]

geez guys...

it's probable that nothing happens in this case without the leaked video.

it's also fact that in this instance justice was fairly served. 

i choose to just appreciate that the system worked for once.

[Chewbacca 7730]

This is not about picking jurors, this was about a comment made by a poster that applied to you, and little hobbsie got his dick twisted that one of his gang got "picked on".   Go fry a turkey....

Ok, Boomer.

[Cajun 11675]

14 hours ago, Anastasis said:

If every trial is just a coin flip, can we just replace all the lawyers with quarters. 

 

[Captainant 27497]

17 minutes ago, Cajun said:

 

Avatar relevant 

[Cajun 11675]

What business is it of your’s whether my avatar is relevant or not, Friendo?

[Helobious 9490]

It always bugged me in that scene that he said his store closed “right now, around dark” and it was sunny as hell outside. I wanted him to lose the coin flip just for that.

[Cajun 11675]

What bugged me were the Jack Links for sale in the background during that scene.

There were no such thing at the time the story was set.

‘That said, my palms sweat every time I watch it.  Coen greatness on full display.

Edited November 26, 2021 by Cajun

[Guest Lobo]

How else would you put it?

[Catdaddyhorn 3444]

On 11/24/2021 at 7:15 PM, TwiceHorn said:

I know this response is half-sarcastic, but I feel like I should explain.  First, I think the federal criminal code covers far too much shit.  Cases where federal and state criminal statutes and jurisdiction overlap should be few and far between and there should be a strong and easily articulated federal purpose behind any federal criminal statute, and especially one that overlaps significantly with a state issue, like murder, agg assault, and false imprisonment.

Related to that is we have the "dual sovereign" system where there is no double jeopardy for trying people for even identical crimes at both the state and federal level.  That can have pretty draconian results, which is recognized by the feds who typically will not charge or prosecute when there is a state prosecution, just as a matter of policy, not because the law requires it.  If the feds had stuck to their knitting on 18 USC, this wouldn't be much of an issue, as feds could rarely prosecute the same crimes as states.

Third, I rather disagree with "hate crime" legislation in the first place, depending on how it's implemented.  This is especially true for the reasons articulated in my first paragraph.  Federal hate crime legislation was passed as a general pander to the civil rights types (ignoring the fact that a new criminal law should be an affront to most civil rights types).  There is almost zero special federal interest in prosecuting common law crimes like murder as hate crimes just because there may be a racial element to them.

So, I'm not changing my views on these issues because the McMichaels are extra-special fuckheads.

Nor am I particularly persuaded by brisket's raising of a possible state pardon that a federal prosecution and conviction might avoid.

 

 

As a layman I always understood the rationale for hate crime legislation to be of the same vein as that for terrorism laws. Now the prosecution of hate crime laws may not always meet this standard, but the history of racial crimes in this country have always served at least 2 purposes. The crime itself is self evident, but the secondary purpose of these crimes was to induce fear in targeted communities. Now perhaps an argument could be made that legislation to combat that secondary purpose is unnecessary in this day and age, but why would it apply for terrorism in one case, but not for racism/hate in another case?

[Bookman 4611]

On 11/25/2021 at 6:44 AM, Dahobbs said:

Just because the coin came up heads doesn't mean that it didn't have an equal chance of coming of tails. 

This is very advanced math that is extremely, extremely difficult for about 30% of the country to understand.

[Nicole44 22028]

ABC 20/20 doing a two hour special on it right now. I get why most people won't want to watch of this of all weekends. But I felt so compelled by this story....I am. RIP Ahmaud...💔

[SHOOTER12 8791]

3 hours ago, Bookman said:

This is very advanced math that is extremely, extremely difficult for about 30% of the country to understand.

Could you explain that please?

[conVINCEd 21468]

1 minute ago, SHOOTER12 said:

Could you explain that please?

If you don’t understand it you are part of the 30%.

[atomheartbevo 89474]

2 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

If you don’t understand it you are part of the 30%.

[SHOOTER12 8791]

3 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

If you don’t understand it you are part of the 30%.

Glad I could help further solidify the point.

[OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys 2059]

13 hours ago, SHOOTER12 said:

Glad I could help further solidify the point.

 

[TwiceHorn 31322]

On 11/26/2021 at 12:19 PM, Catdaddyhorn said:

As a layman I always understood the rationale for hate crime legislation to be of the same vein as that for terrorism laws. Now the prosecution of hate crime laws may not always meet this standard, but the history of racial crimes in this country have always served at least 2 purposes. The crime itself is self evident, but the secondary purpose of these crimes was to induce fear in targeted communities. Now perhaps an argument could be made that legislation to combat that secondary purpose is unnecessary in this day and age, but why would it apply for terrorism in one case, but not for racism/hate in another case?

Not sure I like terrorism offenses, either.  Meaning, similar to hate crimes, already criminal conduct.

I do not "mind" sentencing enhancements upon proof of racial motivation, at all.  But creating a new category of crime bugs me.  Some of that is just me being pedantic or doctrinaire.

[TwiceHorn 31322]

Update on sentencing.  Earlier I had posted, from reading an article, that they were subject to 30 year minimums on the murder counts.

That is wrong.  Murder, felony, malice, or otherwise in Georgia carries a life minimum.  The 30 years is the minimum that must be served before parole eligibility.

Life minimum for any murder seems draconian, even with parole availability at 30 years.  Dear Lord we are in love with some punishment in this country.

[Pato del Muerto 52365]

But it does mean that in this case these 3 will serve 30 or more?  

[TwiceHorn 31322]

24 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

But it does mean that in this case these 3 will serve 30 or more?  

Apparently so.

I'm not sure how I feel about considering availability of parole and whether "we" or juries should consider it in evaluating what is a just sentence.

I think parole is a good thing, or any type of "second look" by those "close" to the convict who can actually see their behavior.  And, sure, you're going to be able to bring up tons of anecdotes of people on parole who go on to commit further crimes.  But sentences mostly end and not all or even many inmates will be rehabilitated, certainly in our system.

Edited November 28, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Pato del Muerto 52365]

Good. No “we convicted  them of murder but don’t want to take too much of their lives away because that isn’t fair so 7 year sentence for those nice white men never meaning no harm that got themselves into a bad situation” issues. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

4 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Good. No “we convicted  them of murder but don’t want to take too much of their lives away because that isn’t fair so 7 year sentence for those nice white men never meaning no harm that got themselves into a bad situation” issues. 

Yeah fuck that noise. You murder, you do hard fucking time.

[Captainant 27497]

33 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Life minimum for any murder seems draconian, even with parole availability at 30 years.

They gave Arbery a life sentence for the crime of being black in their hood. It is a harsh punishment, but examples must be made. Especially when there's a rising trend of vigilante behavior in the country. 

[TexasEd 8064]

The McMichaels made their bed and I think Life with possibility of parole in 30 is reasonable.  Life sentence for the elder McMichael at 64 now.  Travis will be his father's age when eligible.

Roddy maybe not so much but I think he grabbed a gun before he jumped in his truck so since that was his line of thinking getting into this he should be lumped in.  He was too stupid to save himself from this and relied on his stupid friends.  I have a little sympathy for him but they were on the phone with each other coordinating their manhunt.  Roddy, now 50,  will be 80 when first eligible for parole.

The DA who wrote the letter exonerating them after seeing the video needs 5-10 in state to think about their loyalties being to the law or their lynch mobbing friends.

Edited November 28, 2021 by TexasEd

[TwiceHorn 31322]

24 minutes ago, Captainant said:

They gave Arbery a life sentence for the crime of being black in their hood. It is a harsh punishment, but examples must be made. Especially when there's a rising trend of vigilante behavior in the country. 

I'm not speaking in terms of this case.  I am speaking generally.

Example:  Amber Guyger was convicted of murder.  An automatic life sentence for that would have been unjust.  This notwithstanding the differences in murder in Georgia and Texas.  My point being that there are varations of murder, some of which require life, some of which require 30 years, and some of which might require 10 or 20.

Edited November 28, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 31322]

21 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

The DA who wrote the letter exonerating them after seeing the video needs 5-10 in state to think about their loyalties being to the law or their lynch mobbing friends.

Note that that prosecutor, George Barhnill, is not facing criminal charges, I don't believe.  

The one that it is the Glynn County prosecutor, Jackie Johnson, who first "declined" to prosecute, and then handed it off to her buddy because of the conflict of interest, with McMichael having been a DA investigator.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/prosecutor-indicted-misconduct-ahmaud-arbery-death-79797816

Barnhill can probably claim that he was unduly influenced by Johnson when attempting to exonerate them.  And, I don't believe either of them had seen the video when they did what they did.

Edited November 28, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

15 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm not speaking in terms of this case.  I am speaking generally.

Example:  Amber Guyger was convicted of murder.  An automatic life sentence for that would have been unjust.  This notwithstanding the differences in murder in Georgia and Texas.  My point being that there are varations of murder, some of which require life, some of which require 30 years, and some of which might require 10 or 20.

Intentional, capitol murder should be death/ life sentence.

murder in the commission of a crime 30 years 

man slaughter, 10 years min. 

[Pato del Muerto 52365]

Normally you have to investigate something in order to find evidence that would lead to charges.  It tends to not show up when you just interview the parties still living to tell their side.  
 

surprisingly, many people this year have had to learn the hard way that it’s a bad idea to film your crimes and then release them to the public.  It seems intuitive and yet…

[TwiceHorn 31322]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Intentional, capitol murder should be death/ life sentence.

murder in the commission of a crime 30 years 

man slaughter, 10 years min. 

Well, capital murder usually requires commission in the course of another felony.  And all murder is, by definition, intentional.

I don't like mandatory minimums for anything.

[Brisketexan 104746]

Note that that prosecutor, George Barhnill, is not facing criminal charges, I don't believe.  
The one that it is the Glynn County prosecutor, Jackie Johnson, who first "declined" to prosecute, and then handed it off to her buddy because of the conflict of interest, with McMichael having been a DA investigator.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/prosecutor-indicted-misconduct-ahmaud-arbery-death-79797816
Barnhill can probably claim that he was unduly influenced by Johnson when attempting to exonerate them.  And, I don't believe either of them had seen the video when they did what they did.

Johnson saw the video. She cited to it several times in her letter saying “don’t prosecute the defendants, Arbery was the bad guy here.” Crooked. Bitch.

[Genco 3038]

11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Johnson saw the video. She cited to it several times in her letter saying “don’t prosecute the defendants, Arbery was the bad guy here.” Crooked. Bitch.

Barnhill refers to the video in his letter as well.

Edit: We may be referring to the same letter. Barnhill was the author unless Johnson wrote one as well.

Edited November 28, 2021 by Genco

[JimmyJames 12271]

48 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

 

surprisingly, many people this year have had to learn the hard way that it’s a bad idea to film your crimes and then release them to the public.  It seems intuitive and yet…

I see it all the time yet it’s typically an audio phone recording. 

Hey I got this great audio recording of the other side admitting they did it!

Listen to the recording. Uh yeah you actually just destroyed your own case. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

30 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Johnson saw the video. She cited to it several times in her letter saying “don’t prosecute the defendants, Arbery was the bad guy here.” Crooked. Bitch.

I didn’t realize she had seen the video at the time she did that. So fuck her and send her to prison. 

[TexasEd 8064]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Note that that prosecutor, George Barhnill, is not facing criminal charges, I don't believe.  

The one that it is the Glynn County prosecutor, Jackie Johnson, who first "declined" to prosecute, and then handed it off to her buddy because of the conflict of interest, with McMichael having been a DA investigator.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/prosecutor-indicted-misconduct-ahmaud-arbery-death-79797816

Barnhill can probably claim that he was unduly influenced by Johnson when attempting to exonerate them.  And, I don't believe either of them had seen the video when they did what they did.

Barnhill cites the video in the letter saying that Arbry initiated the conflict.