Comments by "ootmaster1" (@ootmaster1) on "Pressured by Race Baiters, Georgia Cops Charge William Bryan With Murder" video.
-
11
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
@Zach0451
"If they did not meet the standards for a citizen's arrest," (they did) "then no citizen's arrest was made, therefore making the interaction an assault.
No it doesnt? how do you figure?no one touched him, and no one held him down, and no one pointed a gun at him until he attacked.. sorry you are wrong here
"It has not been established that he assaulted the man with the shotgun."
The video says otherwise
There are legal grounds for Arbery to have been in fear of his life, making himself entitled to self-defense.
No, you dont engage in " self defense" by attacking a legally armed man...
"Under Georgia law, O.C.G.A. § 16-5-20, a person commits the offense of simple assault when he or she either: (1) Attempts to commit a violent injury to the person of another; or, (2) Commits an act which places another in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury. Further, a person who commits the offense of simple assault shall be guilty of a misdemeanor."
As you can see, this does not require Arbery to have been touched for him to have been assaulted. This is cold, hard fact. You don't have to like it.
where is the" attempt to commit a violent injury" or " immediate receiving of violent injury" here? no one touched him or trained a weapon on him, and they didnt even stop his moment. Aubrey could have continued in literally any other direction than what he did. dart around the truck and assault a man with a shotgun. he deliberately engaged in a situation that put himself in the losing position of self defense...
"You disagreeing with me doesn't make you correct. I am providing you examples that are strictly within the laws of the state of Georgia. You are providing me only with your personal viewpoint, which is irrelevant.
"
You are citing law, and then imposing your opinions into it. but ok its all on video
7
-
6
-
6
-
@Zach0451
We don't know if they met the standard for citizen's arrest or not."
you look up one law but wont look up this one? why? is this not relevant to the discussion of if the citizens arrest is valid.
"No one touched him, no one held him down"
Thanks for helping to debunk the narrative that it was a citizen's arrest. You don't even realize what you just did.
This debunks your " assault" and how does it " debunk" the citizens arrest? i dont follow that leap. You dont quote any citizens arrest laws, and you assume that lack of contact is proof that a citizens arrest is invalid.
The video doesn't say anything definitive. .......Dumbass.
It shows the jogger attacking a guy with a shotgun, and getting shot. And you are postulating that the jogger gets self defense?
"No, you don't engage in self defense by attacking a legally armed man..."
Interesting framing, but let's take a look at the actual self defense law, shall we?
"A person.......
See the last section here:
"*a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself*"
If Arbery reasonably believed he was at risk of great bodily injury, he would have been within his right to "use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm". If the white guys did not adequately execute a citizen's arrest, then this would have left that avenue open for Arbery. Some random guys with guns yelling at you, and then chasing you can give him that "reasonable belief". He would be within his right to defend himself from assault, according to the law.
How are you trying to argue that arbery was " threatened" while he was fleeing? no one pointed guns at him and they were on the call with police at the time... Had he not attacked mc whitey and his shotgun, and waited like, 3 minutes, the cops would have arrived... Furthermore, if your objective is to survive an altercation, i fail to see how rushing the guy armed with a short range weapon is better than running in literally any other direction....
As for the assault allegation. See the 2nd part of the law you conveniently ignored:
"An act which places another in *reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury*.
Men with a gun yelling at you and jumping out of a truck armed with said gun can meet the standard for Arbery feeling *reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury*. He does not need to be touched for this to be assault. The weapon was trained on him, as he was shot. They attempted to impede his movement by trying to apprehend him. And as explained earlier, Arbery could have easily been within his rights to defend himself, and that means possibly trying to disarm the man with the gun. Not very smart imo, but that is a real possibility. You cannot clearly say he deliberately engaged when he is running away and the other men chase after him.
First off, i didnt " ignore it" i asked you to explain how it qualifies in your opinion and you just continued to be a smug twat about it. You conveniently ignore what they were yelling, of the included phrases were " stop" " we just want to talk" and that the police were on their way. At no point prior to arbry charging mc whitey and his shotgun were any weapons trained on him. you can see this in the video. " impede his movement" so instead of him running a different direction he runs TOWARDS the truck? but in this scenario you are calling this self defense.
I am not imposing my opinion on any of this, you have no idea what my opinion actually is. I'm just giving you facts and you'll jump through
you are crafting a scenario that doesnt fit with the video evidence of the incident
5
-
5
-
5
-
3
-
3
-
1
-
1