The Ahmaud Arbery case is basically a case of vigilantism. That is members of a neighborhood watch trying to catch who they believed was the criminal Ahmaud Arbery. They did so incorrectly and as such were found guilty. That being said, citizen arrest laws are English common laws that have been...
Did you watch the trial or even know the evidence of the KR case? There was no vigilantism at all. Kyle was one of HUNDREDS carrying guns for protection that night. Many were also protestors doing so legally. It was the 5th night where previous nights had seen quite a few buildings burned down...
I didn't lie about anything dickhead. Which you seem to do incessantly. Also, unlike you or anyone else on this forum, I have been 100% right on every legal case I've talked about. I also cite actual practicing attorneys and even link their info as well when I use them. Most around here want to...
Devin is to legal analysis as CNN is to news. If the subject doesn't have anything political to it, then he gets it right. The moment a subject has a political slant he takes a hard stance to go through as many mental gymnastic convolutions as possible to make his analysis fit his narrative.
Legal Schmeagol is a dunce. He literally upright lies about the law several times in that video. Devin hasn't ever practiced law. Don't know why anyone watches him. Want to watch what some real practicing criminal attorneys have to say about that video?
Devin just panders to a specific low...
Yah, that is one that I didn't think was proven at all. Prosecution basically trying to claim the mere fact he went to get a gun for the citizens arrest proves malice. I don't agree. There was nothing else the prosecution had to prove that. At a minimum I see that charge being overturned on...
WTF you talking about? I called that these two were guilty from the get go from my gut feeling but that was without all the facts of the case that we saw in court. There were circumstances which they could have been "legal" in their actions, but they instead testified that they weren't trying to...
Jesus. The Majority (I'm being generous, by not saying Everything) of what you say is gibberish. I'm not sure what you heard, but I'm 100% sure you didn't understand it enough to reinterpret it. Hence the gibberish.
Wrong. It is literally a matter of a question of law at this point when NONE of the circumstances of the items of the law are in contention. That isn't gibberish at all. I invite you to watch Rekieta Law on youtube on the coverage of this trial. It is literally said by every lawyer watching the...
The illegal weapon "charge" was never a jury charge. It was a matter of fact legal contention only. The facts of the charge were NEVER in contention by the defense. The defense stated that Kyle was 17, had possession of the weapon, and the weapon was a normal full size over the counter sold...
You don't have to take my word for it. Take the fucking JUDGE'S word for it. He is the one that tossed it. Literally watch WHY it was tossed and why is was so pissed afterwards at the prosecution for trying to keep it as a charge knowing all this time it was not a valid charge to have been brought.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.