Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

145

From a moral standpoint, the three men weren’t wrong. Legally, there seems to be a problem that Nate the Lawyer hints at but doesn’t say directly:

The heart of the defense’s case is that the three men were trying to detain Aubery for a citizen’s arrest until the police came. Now, I don’t know how the law is in Georgia or wherever Aubery was doing his shit, but in NYC, if I’m not mistaken, in order to detain someone you have to witness the crime yourself and the crime has to be at least a misdemeanor. They don’t witness him doing anything but running. They didn’t see him in that house. I forget if someone even informed them that the man was on a property, but even if they did, I am still pretty sure that they would have to witness the crime themselves in order to detain him or else it is unlawful imprisonment. Can someone more knowledgeable than me (lawyer, paralegal, resident of that state) confirm or deny? If that is the case, those three men are fucked because they would have had no legal right to engage the man.

From a moral standpoint, the three men weren’t wrong. Legally, there seems to be a problem that Nate the Lawyer hints at but doesn’t say directly: The heart of the defense’s case is that the three men were trying to detain Aubery for a citizen’s arrest until the police came. Now, I don’t know how the law is in Georgia or wherever Aubery was doing his shit, but in NYC, if I’m not mistaken, in order to detain someone you have to witness the crime yourself and the crime has to be at least a misdemeanor. They don’t witness him doing anything but running. They didn’t see him in that house. I forget if someone even informed them that the man was on a property, but even if they did, I am still pretty sure that they would have to witness the crime themselves in order to detain him or else it is unlawful imprisonment. Can someone more knowledgeable than me (lawyer, paralegal, resident of that state) confirm or deny? If that is the case, those three men are fucked because they would have had no legal right to engage the man.

(post is archived)

[–] • 5 pts

The cops told everyone in the neighborhood that this pos was out there and was dangerous. They said if they come across him not to engage, but if they do, then to detain him until the cops show up. They almost deputized the neighborhood it sounded like to me. That Nate guy is a pos. He was calling those good ol' boys racist, when there's no evidence they did any thing racist. Dumb fucks on the panel just nodded their heads like a bunch of mooks.

[–] • 2 pts

A cop wouldn't tell you to do that. Very unlikely.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Then why would the cop text the owner of the property and tell him to contact mcmichaels if he noticed arbury on the property?

https://www.wrdw.com/content/news/Text-messages-more-video-provide-greater-context-to-Ahmaud-Arbery-case-570570441.html

[–] • 1 pt

Not sure, but if you think about it, it is highly irregular for a Police Officer to volunteer the services of a private citizen in lieu of an actual Police Officer.

[–] • 4 pts

They didn’t see him in that house.

Didn't they spot him coming out of that house?

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

If they saw him exit the house, but he has not forced his way in or gained entry through inconventional means, then it is not a burglary. If he enters conventionally and then leaves the site without breaking and entering, but has items, it is either petty larceny or grand larceny. If he just walks out with nothing in hand, then that may be a criminal trespass, but in most jurisdictions, you would need prominent anti-trespassing signage believe it or not. That is how a a couple of these stupid police auditors get to walk around wherever they want and evade arrest.

[–] • 4 pts

IIRC the house was in construction/renovation and no one lived there.

The jogger went in to try and grab some tools he could resell for cash.

That wasn't the first time the neighborhood was visited by joggers.

[–] • 1 pt

Yes, I know all of that, but if I'm correct they had to personally witness him committing a crime. You can't snatch people up off of hearsay.

[–] • 0 pt

If they saw him exit the house, but he has not forced his way in or gained entry through inconventional means, then it is not a burglary

It would be trespassing.

[–] • 0 pt

Most likely, but not a guarantee since it is not an occupied domicile and may not have had signage prominently posted. I'm pretty sure it would be different if it were an occupied home with people residing in it.

[–] • 3 pts

They defended themselves. In the video the lowlife wrestles for the gun. The media portrayed it as the poor innocent black man who was afraid of being shot by these evil white racists. In reality it was another case of good citizens protecting their community (sound familiar?) against a criminal.

[–] • 0 pt

Completely different. Kyle was being pursued ans assaulted with weapons. These guys attempted to detain someone and it was likely an unlawlful detainment.

[–] • 0 pt

Doesn't change the fact of good guys protecting the community from criminals.

[–] • 1 pt

Man, you guys will do anything to preserve your narrative. I AM NOT EXAMINING THIS MORALLY. THIS IS AN EXAMINATION OF THE LAWS THAT GOVERN THEIR ACTIONS AND THE POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES OF THOSE ACTIONS.

You can be a good, guy, a great guy...a fucking superlative guy, but that does necessarily give them the right to detain or hold someone at gunpoint. You guys are almost as idiotic as a nignog who says that their criminal son dindu nuffin. Stop being emotional and look objectively at the facts.

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

One of those heat of the moment dumb decisions.

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

All Aubrey had to do was sit down until the police came. What would the cops have arrested him for? And even when fleeing you suddenly don't go for a guy holding a gun.

[–] • 1 pt

I agree what is this f’ing shit where people going after people with guns is self defense? It’s suicide.

Were they making it clear they were going to kill him? Or just detain? If just detained, then just detain yourself and charge them for unlawful detainment later. And you get to be alive afterwards too!

[–] • 0 pt

While that is true, you are missing the point, as well: DID THEY HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO DETAIN HIM?

[–] • 1 pt

I'm starting to understand why New York City has a crime problem.

[–] • 1 pt

This is not just NYC. IT is many jurisdictions. I don;t like nigger trespassers at all, but the law is the law. You cannot, as private citizens, form a small posse and go out detaining people without probable cause. They were not police. They were not bounty hunters. and I'm pretty sure they didn't actually witness a misdemeanor or felony with their own eyes. I hate to say it, but this thread needs a lawyer or two ASAP.

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

Just because you illegally detain someone doesn’t make you are a murderer if you defend yourself. It makes you an illegal detainerer.

Going after someone with an open gun is suicide.

They made a choice to illegally detain. The jogger made the choice to make it into a death.

I’m not seeing why they should be expected to be walking law book to know the exact details on when they are allowed to detain or not.

[–] • 2 pts

Oh man. I am thankful for your post because at least you have given a little thought to this, but if you decide to detain, you should 100% know the laws regarding that because you are FORCEFULLY DEPRIVING SOMEONE OF THEIR LIBERTY. You'd better be damned sure before you hold someone at gunpoint that you know the law or you'll be held criminally liable. IF the people had not made the decision to illegally detain at gunpoint, there would be nothing to speak of. This is a far cry from the Rittenhouse case. Not even close. Completely different scenario.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

My itchy fakey finger is twitching. So the nog takes a blast in the belly by a shotgun but isn't blasted away or even knuckled down. Oh sure. Then a second blast and... nothing. Then after a third blast, he goes down.

Never happened.

That third suspect with the big jew-nose didn't come closer and take close up video of the splattered body? Riiiiight.

[–] • 0 pt

He was a nigger who had broken into houses in that neighborhood dozens of times previously. Also, they aren't allowed to call him a "jogger" because they have no evidence he was jogging.

He was a filthy fucking nigger and tried to take the shotgun and got what he deserved. Not guilty.

[–] • 1 pt

AGAIN: I am not talking about FEELINGS, Sir. This is not about what you think should happen to someone. This thread is about exploring the legal arguments for and against the Defendants. If I am correct, then the Defendants are fucked.