Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

I thought this was worth discussing as it happened just north of Jacksonville.

As it should be. Unlike the Rittenhouse case the correct defendants were on the stand in this one.

I figured the shooter would get convicted, I didn't think that the other defendants should have been convicted of what they got.  Of course, I didn't follow this trial as much as the Rittenhouse trial so there may be evidence that I didn't see.

Two for two the justice system can work.

So much for it being unfair because their weren’t more black people on the jury…

(11-24-2021, 03:26 PM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ]So much for it being unfair because their weren’t more black people on the jury…

Shhhhhhh they might get triggered even when we agree the outcome was correct

(11-24-2021, 03:15 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]I figured the shooter would get convicted, I didn't think that the other defendants should have been convicted of what they got.  Of course, I didn't follow this trial as much as the Rittenhouse trial so there may be evidence that I didn't see.

One defendant was convicted of malice murder the other two of felony murder. From what I understand, in Georgia felony murder is when someone is murdered during the commission of a felony if they didn't personally pull the trigger.

They got this one absolutely right. One thing I was a little confused about was the charges of felony murder and murder with malice. maybe someone on here can answer this , but what are those in relation to first and second-degree murder? I guess I’ve never heard those charges worded exactly that way. And seeing as how it was one person was killed how do you get three charges of felony murder? Probably a simple explanation but again I just haven’t heard it worded in that manner.

I've always thought this was an open and shut case. It's not a surprise.

Can we talk about why the county DA didn't want to prosecute originally? He was wrong for that, right?

(11-24-2021, 03:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Can we talk about why the county DA didn't want to prosecute originally?  He was wrong for that, right?

Yes, that's called the "good ole' boys" network. Pops knew the guy from way back so he and Cracklins' got off the hook.

(11-24-2021, 03:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Can we talk about why the county DA didn't want to prosecute originally?  He was wrong for that, right?

Yes they were wrong. Apparently they are facing charges as well.

of course they were, no way they got a fair trial; guilty or not.

(11-24-2021, 03:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Can we talk about why the county DA didn't want to prosecute originally?  He was wrong for that, right?

You have to find some grievance, eh?

(11-24-2021, 05:07 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ]of course they were, no way they got a fair trial; guilty or not.

So, to be clear, you thought they weren't guilty based on what you know. They chased down a guy, assaulted him, then shot him when he tried to defend himself. Aubry is Rittenhouse is Aubry. It's the same case except this one actually put the right criminals on trial.

I don't think anyone can think those guys are innocent.

It was a lynching sans rope.

not a shocker.

(11-24-2021, 03:07 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I thought this was worth discussing as it happened just north of Jacksonville.

And the justice system worked correctly again.

(11-24-2021, 05:39 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-24-2021, 05:07 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ]of course they were, no way they got a fair trial; guilty or not.

So, to be clear, you thought they weren't guilty based on what you know. They chased down a guy, assaulted him, then shot him when he tried to defend himself. Aubry is Rittenhouse is Aubry. It's the same case except this one actually put the right criminals on trial

I don't know if they were or not, I don't know enough about the facts. All I know, is that they did not get a fair trial. They were going to be found guilty NO MATTER WHAT... just like Chauvin...

(11-24-2021, 07:40 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-24-2021, 05:39 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]So, to be clear, you thought they weren't guilty based on what you know. They chased down a guy, assaulted him, then shot him when he tried to defend himself. Aubry is Rittenhouse is Aubry. It's the same case except this one actually put the right criminals on trial

I don't know if they were or not, I don't know enough about the facts. All I know, is that they did not get a fair trial. They were going to be found guilty NO MATTER WHAT... just like Chauvin...

They were guilty.