But the four charges are mostly relevant in that the verdicts for them were independent: The jury could have decided that one of them committed assault but not false imprisonment, and another one committed false imprisonment but not assault, and so find both of them guilty of felony murder, via different arguments. Practically speaking, I’m pretty sure that being found guilty of any one of the felony murder counts would have been equivalent, in terms of sentencing and the like, to being found guilty of all of them.
I’m not familiar with the term “malice murder”: I’m guessing that means “He killed him, as a result of wanting to kill him”? And that “malice murder” has different sentencing guidelines than felony murder?
Express malice is “that deliberate intention unlawfully to take the life of another human being which is manifested by external circumstances capable of proof.” Malice is implied when “no considerable provocation appears and where all the circumstances of the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart.”
One of the reactions I observed - via a quick channel surf to Fox News…was
This verdict proves systemic racism doesn’t exist. So there! Liberals bad!
They’ll probably get racist in the evening hours and start talking about the poor brave defenders of the community railroaded by woke fascists, or something. But they didn’t go there during the three minutes or so I watched.
Just to tease it out some more using this chart. I’m explicitly going for clarity over accuracy.
Malice Murder = premeditated murder. Gregory thought about killing Mr. Arbery, and then did so.
Felony Murder = If you commit a felony, and someone is murdered during the course of that felony.
The Felonies:
(I think of assault like this: Assault & Battery = assault is pulling your arm back to punch someone; battery is the punching.
Ag. Assault (Gun) = pointing a gun at Mr. Arbery (scared you might shoot him). Ag. Assault (Vehicle) = using your vehicle as a potential weapon against Mr. Arbery (scared you might run him over). False Imprisonment = restricting someone’s movement without authority. They trapped Mr. Arbery.
Thus, the jury did not believe the citizen’s arrest stuff. Attempt to False Imprisonment = I’m less clear here. I think it’s the chasing part prior to actually restricting his movement; trying to restrict his movement, but not yet doing so.
Each felony you commit, can get you a felony murder charge. Bryan did not have a weapon. I imagine that could be why jury found not guilting for the ag. assault with a weapon.
It’s a function of the concept of “felony murder” which is a (non-murder) felony that results in a death. If you commit a bunch of felonies, you’re guilty of multiple felony murders even if there is only one death.
I don’t know how often it’s charged this way (many felonies involve multiple felonies), but Bryan is a fine example: he was acquitted of one of the felonies (and therefore the felony murder) but convicted of the other felonies.
I would assume that all of these sentences would run concurrently, so I don’t know if it makes a practical difference.
In other states, a similar crime might go by a different name, such as “aggravated murder” or “first-degree murder.” This is just a rough equivalence: the actual elements of the statutory crimes will vary from state to state.
The common law crime of “murder” is what we usually think of as “second-degree murder,” in a cop TV show state of mind.
One thing that should give everyone pause who is quite rightly relieved about a just verdict in this case is how close it came to not being a case at all, with the three perps nearly succeeding in completely getting away with the blatant murder of an innocent, unarmed black man. It was two months before the arrests were made, and only because of intense pressure by the victim’s family and the public and the availability of incontrovertible video evidence.
The situation was undoubtedly exacerbated by the fact that the elder McMichael had ties to the DA’s office and was able to trigger a corrupt coverup. But that said, I think this is fundamentally a clash between modern principles of civil rights and the deeply entrenched racism of the South. I have no doubt that the three accused, and now convicted, are absolutely convinced of their role as good citizens doing the right thing to protect the community against the sort of individual whose race, in their minds, historically has been nothing but trouble. In their minds, the world has inexplicably turned against “the good guys”, and they are the victims.
There’s some shocking detail in this story, not the least of which is that the elder McMichael was at least dimly aware that the Deep South was no longer what it used to be, that he was in potential trouble, and was calling in favours with the DA’s office:
From wolfpup’s link:
“Former Brunswick District Attorney Jackie Johnson has been indicted on charges of violating her oath as a public officer and obstructing a police officer.”
That’s really good news.
Correct but leaves out that #1 contacted #2 before she recused and then recommended him for the gig.
The indictment additionally states that Johnson “sought the assistance of Waycross Judicial Circuit District Attorney George E. Barnhill” and, after recusing herself, allegedly recommended Barnhill take over as prosecutor without disclosing she had sought his assistance about the case.
Plus, the # 2 prosecutor recused himself, and yet wrote a letter to the third prosecutor, recommending no charges be laid. Odd definition of “recusing for conflict of interest.”
There’s a pretty good chance this wouldn’t have even come to trial had the video of the incident not gone viral, right?
So why in the bloody hell did one of the suspects take a video?! To look at it a million times at home and laugh at the black guy as he bleeds to death? What is it with people videotaping themselves committing crimes? We saw it on January 6, too.
They don’t think they are committing crimes. In many cases they honestly think they are doing the right and honorable thing. The Jan 6th people were more out on the fringe delusional than most, but Bryan was a more regular sort of fucked up:
“Look here’s us chasing this likely criminal. Notice how he is black. Look how he’s running and refusing to stop - he MUST be up to no good. It’s on him for forcing us to pursue and nearly run him down. Look here’s him resisting our lawful arrest and making himself a threat. Here’s him getting shot. It’s sad but we had to defend ourselves against his dangerous actions.”
This video was clear exoneration to someone like Bryan whose world view is skewed by his own bigoted, parochial outlook. That other people viewed it differently was probably at least a mild shock to the system. “No, no - you’re looking at it all wrong. We HAD to shoot him. Can’t you see that?”
While I’m relieved about the verdict, I’m not feeling much joy. The fact that an open-and shut case in 2021 still had so many of us on the edge of our seats does not say good things about where the US stands now.
The conservatives I know seem to view their satisfaction with the verdict as a badge of honor and proof they’re not racists. I’ve seen some “Look how far we’ve come!” comments, an expression which has always struck me as a disingenuous, convenient way to avoid recognizing how far we have to go.
Indeed. As I said earlier, the three murderous racists very nearly got away scot-free without even being charged, in the fine tradition of the good ol’ boy racists of the Old South. And this particular demographic of this particular generation will go to their graves believing to the end that they did the right thing, and were themselves victims of an upside-down society where, to quote Harry J. Anslinger (he of Prohibition and Reefer Madness fame) “reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men”.
This also explains why right-wingers were happy for Rittenhouse to go on Tucker Carlson’s show and pronounce that he isn’t a racist and he’s in favor of Black Lives Matter.