Well...How Do You See The Arbery Case Going? I'm thinking these cases come down to what your thoughts or beliefs were before the case started, how good a case is it from a defense or...

woodguru

I'm thinking these cases come down to what your thoughts or beliefs were before the case started, how good a case is it from a defense or prosecution's position?

This one is devoid of any defense for stopping and accosting a jogger...these guys are going down, the weak charge being on the 3rd person/witness, I'm not sure of what the prosecution's case was against him.

PeterS

woodguru wrote:

I'm thinking these cases come down to what your thoughts or beliefs were before the case started, how good a case is it from a defense or prosecution's position?

This one is devoid of any defense for stopping and accosting a jogger...these guys are going down, the weak charge being on the 3rd person/witness, I'm not sure of what the prosecution's case was against him.

It's the same self-defense argument that Rittenhouse used. With one black on the jury, I expect it to be hung.

microphor Loc: Home is TN

woodguru wrote:

I'm thinking these cases come down to what your thoughts or beliefs were before the case started, how good a case is it from a defense or prosecution's position?

This one is devoid of any defense for stopping and accosting a jogger...these guys are going down, the weak charge being on the 3rd person/witness, I'm not sure of what the prosecution's case was against him.

This trial has not seen as much news sources or info as Rittenhouse but based on what we know so far, I would have to say this is murder, to what degree, I don't know.

Weewillynobeerspilly Loc: North central Texas

woodguru wrote:

I'm thinking these cases come down to what your thoughts or beliefs were before the case started, how good a case is it from a defense or prosecution's position?

This one is devoid of any defense for stopping and accosting a jogger...these guys are going down, the weak charge being on the 3rd person/witness, I'm not sure of what the prosecution's case was against him.

The spook was guilty as are most, he was a criminal....... with that said woody, they are guilty due to the manner in which they commited the act.... wasnt their property, wasn't a felony if he was tresspassing........... and with the amount of time involved there was ample opportunity to request law enforcement. ......... on top of that, they didn't deploy the throw down weapon, they didn't create wounds to build the story around.... and most of all.... they didn't take the carcas and wrap it in 1/2" chicken wire with a few weights and chum catfish in a deep river like we are taught. .... yep, many failures on their part caused the unfortunate and senseless guilty verdict if it comes

microphor Loc: Home is TN

PeterS wrote:

It's the same self-defense argument that Rittenhouse used. With one black on the jury, I expect it to be hung.

That absolutely is a lie. There is video evidence and eye wittness accounts that Rittenhouse was defending himself.

Weewillynobeerspilly Loc: North central Texas

PeterS wrote:

It's the same self-defense argument that Rittenhouse used. With one black on the jury, I expect it to be hung.

Only one black because the rest couldn't pass the one question test.... what's your fathers name? A blank space is a fail.

woodguru

PeterS wrote:

It's the same self-defense argument that Rittenhouse used. With one black on the jury, I expect it to be hung.

Not even close to the same thing...too clear that they chased down and obstructed a guy jogging, and they never came close to giving reasons for suspecting him of anything. It's the no weapon, no knife, no gun testimony that went with the "needed to stop him, he wasn't stopping...(so I shot him)" that is devastating.

I think that the fact that there is no room for spinning this makes is totally uninteresting to the right, they only want what they can defend no matter how weakly

woodguru

microphor wrote:

That absolutely is a lie. There is video evidence and eye wittness accounts that Rittenhouse was defending himself.

Defending himself against what? He was running away from having shot someone, those chasing him were trying to stop him, yelling he shot someone, he is a shooter.

JW

woodguru wrote:

Defending himself against what? He was running away from having shot someone, those chasing him were trying to stop him, yelling he shot someone, he is a shooter.

Against a guy with a glock semi-automatic pistol, for one. Against a guy beating him on the head with a skateboard for another. Against a hardened criminal who said he would k**l him.

microphor Loc: Home is TN

woodguru wrote:

Defending himself against what? He was running away from having shot someone, those chasing him were trying to stop him, yelling he shot someone, he is a shooter.

Eye witness says first guy tried to grab his weapon, I would shoot a Mother F..er try to take my weapon. did you even watch the trial and testimony? I don't think you did, you're just spewing h**e ad usual

microphor Loc: Home is TN

JW wrote:

Against a guy with a glock semi-automatic pistol, for one. Against a guy beating him on the head with a skateboard for another. Against a hardened criminal who said he would k**l him.

Thanks JW. Woody didn't even watch the trial obviously, he just listen to some ugly, h**e filled, ignorant, wanna be's spread h**e and joined the choir.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

PeterS wrote:

It's the same self-defense argument that Rittenhouse used. With one black on the jury, I expect it to be hung.

You have very limited thinking sk**ls.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

PeterS wrote:

It's the same self-defense argument that Rittenhouse used. With one black on the jury, I expect it to be hung.

Here's a wonderful idea.

Find the steepest road within 50 miles of your house and run your walker as fast down the hill as possible....p.s..I'll pay you 100 bucks cash for a video.

Gatsby

woodguru wrote:

I'm thinking these cases come down to what your thoughts or beliefs were before the case started, how good a case is it from a defense or prosecution's position?

This one is devoid of any defense for stopping and accosting a jogger...these guys are going down, the weak charge being on the 3rd person/witness, I'm not sure of what the prosecution's case was against him.

Arbury was shot while committing a violent felony.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

PeterS wrote:

It's the same self-defense argument that Rittenhouse used. With one black on the jury, I expect it to be hung.

I looked up the word stupid. Your picture was next to it.

There is no self-defense argument being used, nor is it applicable.