The murder of Ahmaud Arbery/All three perpetrators found guilty

Actually scratch that I do. The basis is one side is black the other side is white.

Originally posted by Surtur
I have been trying to understand the basis for your opinion, still can't.

I'm not going to repeat it again. feel free to disagree since it's just opinion vs opinion.

and what about my argument, rooted in factual law, concerning ddm's precious youtube video in question, which you have been tirelessly cheerleading? no comment? why would that be, my son?

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
I'm not going to repeat it again. feel free to disagree since it's just opinion vs opinion.

and what about my argument, rooted in factual law, concerning the video in question which you have been tirelessly cheerleading? no comment? why would that be, my son?

Did you even watch DDM's video?

Originally posted by Surtur
Did you even watch DDM's video?

so you'll keep resorting to accusing me of not watching the video?

if you are too cowardly to confront the fact of easily dismissable circumstancial evidence and forced-narrative (which is the sum total of ddm's video), why continue arguing against it?

where is that proof of criminal intent?

Just curious if you watched

I already said that I did, several times. why are we on this loop? are you deliberately time-waster trolling to avoid my indesputable point, pal o' mine?

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
the irrelevance of circumstancial evidence is not a white privilege, but a right of all u.s. citizens; and "looking suspicious" is not probable cause for citizens arrest.

no. evidence. of. criminal. intent.

you seem desperate to avoid this case-closing point while continuing to argue against it and accusing me of not watching ddm's video. why is that, my child?

Be honest: what do you think he was doing in the video?

Keeping in mind I have said even if he was a thief they shouldn't have gone after him.

Originally posted by Surtur
Be honest: what do you think he was doing in the video?

already said that I did, because I did. KeKlord420 presented a marvelously scripted and narrated case of why arbery seemed to have behaved suspiciously, which is irrelevant to probable cause for citizens arrest.

Originally posted by Surtur

Keeping in mind I have said even if he was a thief they shouldn't have gone after him.

then if we agree that there was no proof of criminal intent, and no just cause to apprehend, it seems we agree. so what are we arguing about, my son?

I mean it seems pretty clear he had intent to do some crime. I have no problem with someone saying that while also saying "McMichaels shouldn't have done anything".

The people who act like he's an innocent jogger...ehhhhh.

Originally posted by Surtur
I mean it seems pretty clear he had intent to do some crime. I have no problem with someone saying that while also saying "McMichaels shouldn't have done anything".

The people who act like he's an innocent jogger...ehhhhh.

maybe he was just surveying the construction progress and had a sudden IBS attack and ran off to find a toilet, just as McMichaels' coincidentally [air quotes] didn't notice a single white trespassers even though there were several.

both seem suspicious, and that means nothing in the eyes of the law.

so we agree: no. probable. cause.

then we must also agree the "innocent jogger" narrative is a lie, right?

Originally posted by Surtur
then we must also agree the "innocent jogger" narrative is a lie, right?

no we do not 🙂

Appearing suspicious is not proof of criminal intent, just as seeming to be racially biased is not proof of racial bias.

how long must we do this dance? my legs are starting to get tired

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
no we do not 🙂

Appearing suspicious is not proof of criminal intent, just as seeming to be racially biased is not proof of racial bias.

how long must we do this dance? my legs are starting to get tired

Give me a plausible explanation of what he was doing

already did.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
maybe he was just surveying the construction progress and had a sudden IBS attack and ran off to find a toilet, just as McMichaels' [b]coincidentally [air quotes] didn't notice a single white trespassers even though there were several.

both seem suspicious, and that means nothing in the eyes of the law.

so we agree: no. probable. cause. [/B]

You have an interesting definition of plausible

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
already did.

Okay so not a serious answer.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You have an interesting definition of plausible

your feelings are irrelevant to the argument, nor the plausibly of my hypothetical example

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay so not a serious answer.

your feelings are irrelevant to the argument, nor the plausibly of my hypothetical example

so let's review:
-appearing suspicious is not a crime
-there was no probable cause for citizens arrest
-there was no proof of criminal intent
-the three stooges will be eating lots and lots of ass-flavored grape jelly

You didn't give a serious answer to what he plausibly might have been doing.

I assume because you know you can't.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
your feelings are irrelevant to the argument, nor the plausibly of my hypothetical example

so let's review:
-appearing suspicious is not a crime
-there was no probable cause for citizens arrest
-there was no proof of criminal intent
-the three stooges will be eating lots and lots of ass-flavored grape jelly

Got people arriving soon so I'm heading out for the night. Last thing I'll say for the night is you know Arbery's behavior looks bad. You can't give a plausible explanation.

You tried to mock it and bring up IBS cuz u said that with the McMichaels. But them not spending every waking moment monitoring a property is actually plausible lol. It wouldn't require any medical condition.

So maybe tomorrow I'll come back and I will find Bash gave a legit plausible scenario for what Arbery was doing.