The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
murder of Ahmaud Arbery.

I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.

On 2021-11-24 7:33 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
> murder of Ahmaud Arbery.
>
> I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
> broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.
>
I very much doubt it. They only declare the system broken when it fails
to deliver the verdict they want. Otherwise, it is working perfectly.

--
Rhino

On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 20:57:50 -0500, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>On 2021-11-24 7:33 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>> murder of Ahmaud Arbery.
>>
>> I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>> broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.
>>
>I very much doubt it. They only declare the system broken when it fails
>to deliver the verdict they want. Otherwise, it is working perfectly.

As I saw elsewhere the jury system worked as expected. The system
didn't exactly set a shining example when given the process it took
just to get to charges being raised against the trio. It seems likely
that the case would never moved forward without the release of that
video of the trio going after Arbery.

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>Wed, 24 Nov 2021 20:57:50 -0500, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:
>>On 2021-11-24 7:33 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.

>>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.

>>I very much doubt it. They only declare the system broken when it fails
>>to deliver the verdict they want. Otherwise, it is working perfectly.

>As I saw elsewhere the jury system worked as expected. The system
>didn't exactly set a shining example when given the process it took
>just to get to charges being raised against the trio. It seems likely
>that the case would never moved forward without the release of that
>video of the trio going after Arbery.

Isn't this the video Bryan took? Didn't the police have it? I'm confused.

On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 03:49:28 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>Wed, 24 Nov 2021 20:57:50 -0500, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:
>>>On 2021-11-24 7:33 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
>>>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>>>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.
>
>>>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>>>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.
>
>>>I very much doubt it. They only declare the system broken when it fails
>>>to deliver the verdict they want. Otherwise, it is working perfectly.
>
>>As I saw elsewhere the jury system worked as expected. The system
>>didn't exactly set a shining example when given the process it took
>>just to get to charges being raised against the trio. It seems likely
>>that the case would never moved forward without the release of that
>>video of the trio going after Arbery.
>
>Isn't this the video Bryan took? Didn't the police have it? I'm confused.

I don't know if the police had it. According to what I read he gave it
to his attorney who then released it to the public. This was in May
and that's when things started moving quickly. Before that nothing
seemed to be happening.

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>Thu, 25 Nov 2021 03:49:28 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>:
>>shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>Wed, 24 Nov 2021 20:57:50 -0500, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:
>>>>On 2021-11-24 7:33 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>>>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>>>>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.

>>>>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>>>>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.

>>>>I very much doubt it. They only declare the system broken when it fails
>>>>to deliver the verdict they want. Otherwise, it is working perfectly.

>>>As I saw elsewhere the jury system worked as expected. The system
>>>didn't exactly set a shining example when given the process it took
>>>just to get to charges being raised against the trio. It seems likely
>>>that the case would never moved forward without the release of that
>>>video of the trio going after Arbery.

>>Isn't this the video Bryan took? Didn't the police have it? I'm confused.

>I don't know if the police had it. According to what I read he gave it
>to his attorney who then released it to the public. This was in May
>and that's when things started moving quickly. Before that nothing
>seemed to be happening.

Waitaminit

The attorney released evidence created by his own client implicating
him in a murder?

On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
> murder of Ahmaud Arbery.
>
> I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
> broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.

Vigilantism reared its ugly head in both.

It was amazing that a predominantly white jury in the Deep South came up with that decision.

On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 11:54:03 PM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
> >Thu, 25 Nov 2021 03:49:28 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>:
> >>shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
> >>>Wed, 24 Nov 2021 20:57:50 -0500, Rhino <no_offlin...@example.com>:
> >>>>On 2021-11-24 7:33 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
> >>>>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
> >>>>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.
>
> >>>>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
> >>>>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.
>
> >>>>I very much doubt it. They only declare the system broken when it fails
> >>>>to deliver the verdict they want. Otherwise, it is working perfectly.
>
> >>>As I saw elsewhere the jury system worked as expected. The system
> >>>didn't exactly set a shining example when given the process it took
> >>>just to get to charges being raised against the trio. It seems likely
> >>>that the case would never moved forward without the release of that
> >>>video of the trio going after Arbery.
>
> >>Isn't this the video Bryan took? Didn't the police have it? I'm confused.
>
> >I don't know if the police had it. According to what I read he gave it
> >to his attorney who then released it to the public. This was in May
> >and that's when things started moving quickly. Before that nothing
> >seemed to be happening.
> Waitaminit
>
> The attorney released evidence created by his own client implicating
> him in a murder?

My understanding is that the lawyer no longer represented him when the video was handed over to the police.

Marc Catone <marc.catone@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 11:54:03 PM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>Thu, 25 Nov 2021 03:49:28 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>:
>>>>shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>Wed, 24 Nov 2021 20:57:50 -0500, Rhino <no_offlin...@example.com>:
>>>>>>On 2021-11-24 7:33 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>>>>>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>>>>>>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.

>>>>>>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>>>>>>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.

>>>>>>I very much doubt it. They only declare the system broken when it fails
>>>>>>to deliver the verdict they want. Otherwise, it is working perfectly.

>>>>>As I saw elsewhere the jury system worked as expected. The system
>>>>>didn't exactly set a shining example when given the process it took
>>>>>just to get to charges being raised against the trio. It seems likely
>>>>>that the case would never moved forward without the release of that
>>>>>video of the trio going after Arbery.

>>>>Isn't this the video Bryan took? Didn't the police have it? I'm confused.

>>>I don't know if the police had it. According to what I read he gave it
>>>to his attorney who then released it to the public. This was in May
>>>and that's when things started moving quickly. Before that nothing
>>>seemed to be happening.
>>Waitaminit

>>The attorney released evidence created by his own client implicating
>>him in a murder?

>My understanding is that the lawyer no longer represented him when the
>video was handed over to the police.

That doesn't make any sense either. Even if he's no longer the attorney,
he is barred by legal ethics from acting against his former client in
that manner.

Marc Catone <marc.catone@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.

>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.

>Vigilantism reared its ugly head in both.

That's not what vigilantism means. Rittenhouse wasn't charged with
shooting looters. Travis McMichael made shit up that Arbery was
suspected of a fictitious crime.

>It was amazing that a predominantly white jury in the Deep South came up
>with that decision.

Why? Juries take their oaths seriously. The judge ruled that the law
of citizens arrest the three defendants were relying on was irrelevant
to killing a man innocent of a (fictitious) crime.

What did the Kenosha County jury get wrong?

On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 04:53:59 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>Thu, 25 Nov 2021 03:49:28 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>:
>>>shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>Wed, 24 Nov 2021 20:57:50 -0500, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:
>>>>>On 2021-11-24 7:33 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
>>>>>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>>>>>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.
>
>>>>>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>>>>>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.
>
>>>>>I very much doubt it. They only declare the system broken when it fails
>>>>>to deliver the verdict they want. Otherwise, it is working perfectly.
>
>>>>As I saw elsewhere the jury system worked as expected. The system
>>>>didn't exactly set a shining example when given the process it took
>>>>just to get to charges being raised against the trio. It seems likely
>>>>that the case would never moved forward without the release of that
>>>>video of the trio going after Arbery.
>
>>>Isn't this the video Bryan took? Didn't the police have it? I'm confused.
>
>>I don't know if the police had it. According to what I read he gave it
>>to his attorney who then released it to the public. This was in May
>>and that's when things started moving quickly. Before that nothing
>>seemed to be happening.
>
>Waitaminit
>
>The attorney released evidence created by his own client implicating
>him in a murder?

Yeah, it's not something you hear of every day but then a lot of
things that happened in this case were quite unusual. Here's an
article pointing out the timeline of events in the case:

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-timeline-murder-trial-1/38152482

May 5, 2020: A Brunswick radio station uploads footage of Arbery's
shooting to its website, it quickly goes viral and puts a national
spotlight on the case.

It is later revealed that attorney Alan Tucker released the footage
after it was given to him by Bryan, who shot the video.

========
So one of the men involved in the killing recorded the entire thing
and then gave the video over to the attorney who then later released
it to the local media. It seems like without that happening the case
would have died without anyone being charged.

On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 05:22:32 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>Marc Catone <marc.catone@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
>>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.
>
>>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.
>
>>Vigilantism reared its ugly head in both.
>
>That's not what vigilantism means. Rittenhouse wasn't charged with
>shooting looters. Travis McMichael made shit up that Arbery was
>suspected of a fictitious crime.

My understanding is that there actually was a crime where some
materials from a construction site had been taken some time before.
That and the video of Arbery in the construction site (I'm not clear
if this is the one where the theft had occurred or not) led to the
trio assuming that he must be guilty of the theft.

>>It was amazing that a predominantly white jury in the Deep South came up
>>with that decision.
>
>Why? Juries take their oaths seriously. The judge ruled that the law
>of citizens arrest the three defendants were relying on was irrelevant
>to killing a man innocent of a (fictitious) crime.
>
>What did the Kenosha County jury get wrong?

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>Thu, 25 Nov 2021 05:22:32 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>:
>>Marc Catone <marc.catone@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>>>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.

>>>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>>>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.

>>>Vigilantism reared its ugly head in both.

>>That's not what vigilantism means. Rittenhouse wasn't charged with
>>shooting looters. Travis McMichael made shit up that Arbery was
>>suspected of a fictitious crime.

>My understanding is that there actually was a crime where some
>materials from a construction site had been taken some time before.
>That and the video of Arbery in the construction site (I'm not clear
>if this is the one where the theft had occurred or not) led to the
>trio assuming that he must be guilty of the theft.

I realize that Arbery had jogged through the construction site. It's
just that he was jogging and in no position to steal anything. That's
why McMichael was no vigilante.

>>>It was amazing that a predominantly white jury in the Deep South came up
>>>with that decision.

>>Why? Juries take their oaths seriously. The judge ruled that the law
>>of citizens arrest the three defendants were relying on was irrelevant
>>to killing a man innocent of a (fictitious) crime.

>>What did the Kenosha County jury get wrong?

On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 07:33:38 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>Thu, 25 Nov 2021 05:22:32 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>:
>>>Marc Catone <marc.catone@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
>>>>>The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
>>>>>murder of Ahmaud Arbery.
>
>>>>>I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
>>>>>broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.
>
>>>>Vigilantism reared its ugly head in both.
>
>>>That's not what vigilantism means. Rittenhouse wasn't charged with
>>>shooting looters. Travis McMichael made shit up that Arbery was
>>>suspected of a fictitious crime.
>
>>My understanding is that there actually was a crime where some
>>materials from a construction site had been taken some time before.
>>That and the video of Arbery in the construction site (I'm not clear
>>if this is the one where the theft had occurred or not) led to the
>>trio assuming that he must be guilty of the theft.
>
>I realize that Arbery had jogged through the construction site. It's
>just that he was jogging and in no position to steal anything. That's
>why McMichael was no vigilante.

Agreed. They made the leap from someone stole from a construction site
some time recently AND they had a video of Arbery walking through the
construction site but taking nothing TO assuming that Arbery must be
guilty of the theft. Then decided to take matters into their own hands
when they saw him jogging through the area some time later.

So they had no evidence that Arbery was guilty of anything but natural
curiosity when a new home was being built in the area. Oh, and being
black as I don't think the results would have been the same if he had
been a white guy.

> Adam H. Kerman
>
> The McMichaels and Bryan were convicted on 23 charges related to the
> murder of Ahmaud Arbery.
>
> I wonder if the members of the news media who declared the jury system
> broken after Rittenhouse's acquittal are still of that opinion.

Indeed, and I believe it only took the jury eight hours or so to reach the verdict.

The court system isn't prefect but it usually gets it right, both in this case and
the Rittenhouse trial.

On Thursday, November 25, 2021 at 12:22:36 AM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

> What did the Kenosha County jury get wrong?

That it was self-defense.

On Thursday, November 25, 2021 at 12:15:00 AM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

> That doesn't make any sense either. Even if he's no longer the attorney,
> he is barred by legal ethics from acting against his former client in
> that manner.

Life is funny...sometimes people do the right thing.

Marc Catone <marc.catone@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, November 25, 2021 at 12:22:36 AM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>What did the Kenosha County jury get wrong?

>That it was self-defense.

Are you going to support your position, considering that witnesses for
the prosecution and video evidence supported the defense's self defense
case?

Marc Catone <marc.catone@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, November 25, 2021 at 12:15:00 AM UTC-5, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>That doesn't make any sense either. Even if he's no longer the attorney,
>>he is barred by legal ethics from acting against his former client in
>>that manner.

>Life is funny...sometimes people do the right thing.

By definition, ethical violations are the wrong thing. If a lawyer
violates certain ethics, it's a criminal act, specifically the one about
betraying a client's confidence.

You think the Sixth Amendment civil right to counsel is a bad thing?