Good catch. Some time autocorrect gets you. From the DA report. If they saw him actively breaking into houses, it sounds like they're in the clear.
We know society has problems. They ain't goin away either. One of which wouldnt be him carrying if he felt the need. So basically it was a stupid attempt at a gun point. Oh I wouldnt say that. If you didnt we wouldnt be 2 pages in. Is the DA crooked? He wouldn't be the first.
But just because the guy wasn't wearing a gun belt doesn't mean that they knew he was unarmed. Hell they even make running shorts and pants that have a pocket sewed into them to carry
"Thank God those two good Samaritans are okay" is not a conclusion I can ever draw from that recording. I'm not sure what it is that could come out to change the facts of one clearly seeing the jogger come upon a truck, in which an armed man is in the bed and another armed man has gotten out of the cab and pointed a gun at him as he attempts to run around the truck. On a public street. Here's the thing about your last sentence... It suggests that if they are "not guilty," they should face no charges... But that isn't how our system works at all. You get charged so the state can attempt to prove you guilty. You don't get charged after being found guilty. I'd say it is pretty obvious that brandishing firearms towards a random member of the public running down the road is a crime. It's against most states' laws. And yet... Oh well!
So what if he was armed? Could I hold up those two since they're armed? I think they seem suspicious. They've even got a truck to move stolen goods. This guy was on foot, in shorts. What difference will it make to you if they find out he had a glock in his pocket?
couple of dudes wanted to play cop because they saw a black guy jogging through their neighborhood and thought he was the burglar they saw on a security camera a few days before. This is what the dudes who shot him said to the cops directly. The video shows them confronting him as he's running on the road. I'm sure Georgia has carved out some laws that make this legal but it's [uck fay]ed up that you can attempt to detain someone with force on a public street and then blast them when they resist it because you "fear for your life" after you bit off more than you could chew if other evidence comes out showing he was actually some super predator just off camera then alright, lets see it and I'll change my tune but "he looked like a burglar we saw on a camera in the neighborhood before" should not be remotely justifiable reasoning for this mess jmo of course
I agree with all of this, given all that we now know. Start here, within reason, and we’ll be fast friends.
I’ve got no problem with that, and honestly, would greatly prefer people just coming right out and saying so. But the truth will come out, whatever that may be, anyways.
No way this was justified, even if the jogger was running down the street with the shooter's TV on his shoulder and a gun in his pocket. If they legitimately thought this guy had previously broken into homes in the area, call the police and maybe follow the guy at a safe distance so you can inform the police of the guy's location. Setting up shop in the middle of the street with gun drawn and confronting the guy was not a justified action.
More info is needed to be absolutely sure, but I say hang those two old boys in the town square if there isn't some extremely compelling evidence showing they were justified shooting down some unarmed dude in the middle of the street. I call right now for a public flogging before a public hanging if they are guilty. One observation I have is that the story I read on the facebooks a couple days ago about this incident had the guy as a local sports star in high school a few years back who ran to stay in shape and was doing just that. That doesn't exactly look like any kind of decent running attire, and I say that because of his shorts drooping so low they look like capri pants as he gets to the truck, wearing a belt, and his shorts falling as he struggles. After he fights, he pulls them up before he falls at the end. It doesn't necessarily look like he was just out for a run based on his attire. I get it that not everybody can afford nice running gear, but generally I'd assume most folks who stay active have some kind of semi-appropriate apparel for such purposes. It's proof of nothing, and it really doesn't matter either way. The point is narratives seem to be forming on both sides of this that are questionable. All the video shows is an apparently unarmed man was shot dead in the middle of the street after seemingly trying to, at least initially, avoid his killers. I would be curious what kind of standard the DA is using in the application of the following: His whole defense used to not place them under arrest hinges on this in my opinion. The rest is just window dressing. Were the guys there for these crimes? What constitutes their immediate knowledge? If there are no answers or poor answers for these questions, flog the DA right along beside them and let him watch their hanging. If these questions have no answer, you have a couple of rednecks looking for trouble. Oh, and screw running with a gun. Folks who run with guns are in the military, or they have a convenient spot to carry because of their small penis or lack thereof.
I personally don’t think it was justified but by GA law if what the da posted is true. Legally it is probably justified. I know a lot of police stations aren’t responding to thief calls and other non emergency calls right now due to the virus
It won’t make any difference to me if he’s armed as that’s he right as a citizen. If he saw those two in the truck committing a crime, it appears in GA legally he could have tried to detain them till the police got there. Seems like this case will be pretty clear. If they saw him breaking into houses, they’re in the clear legally. If they just thought it was someone that broke into houses a few days ago, they’ll be charged with man slaughter
That’s not what I’ve stated at all but don’t that let that ever stop you from creating your emotional straw men. If they saw the guy running breaking into houses, legally in ga they’re in the clear. Legally justified doesn’t mean morally justified. If they just thought it was someone they wanted to question. They’ll be charged and convicted.
Personally, I'll grant that they may have been trying to detain him. The whole parking in the middle of the road with a gun and the shooter drifiting toward the the other side as the victim/suspect seems to try to go around the other side lines up with this. IMO, if they weren't trying to detain him, he was a dumbass who attacked two rednecks with guns for questionable reasons at best.
