GUILTY GA - Ahmaud Arbery, 25, jogger, fatally shot by former LEO and son, Brunswick, Feb 2020 *Arrests* #6

[Hope4More]

First week in January, 2022.

In national news, that the DOJ had spoken to AA's family about a plea deal in which the MMs would plead guilty to being motivated by racial hatred & receive 30 year sentences.

Included in that story, that AA's family did not want to accept *any* plea deal. They couldn't have been any clearer about wanting their day in federal court.

Ahmaud Arbery's family says they rejected a plea deal for federal hate crime charges

 

[Mandos]

First week in January, 2022.

In national news, that the DOJ had spoken to AA's family about a plea deal in which the MMs would plead guilty to being motivated by racial hatred & receive 30 year sentences.

Included in that story, that AA's family did not want to accept *any* plea deal. They couldn't have been any clearer about wanting their day in federal court.

Ahmaud Arbery's family says they rejected a plea deal for federal hate crime charges

Having watched the video fragment I'm rather puzzled. They want a full trial, so the McMichaels have to admit to the hateful nature of what they did? Even though the plea deal would have the McMichaels admit in open court that they're guilty of a hate crime? Which is exactly what they want, so why have a full trial? If they would've said that 30 years was too little it would've made more sense, but they say nothing about that.

Also, I can't help but notice that the family seems to believe that they have the right to veto plea deals, which makes me wonder what their lawyers are telling them. They seem to be setting the family up for future disappointment, especially if they give the impression that the family gets a say about the proposed transfer or that the federal judge could actually veto a transfer.

 

[kaen]

If so, that just adds to the unfortunate ironies of this situation. If the MMs decide to drop their pleas & go to trial, AA's family is guaranteed to not get what they want. If the MMs are found guilty, they are going to federal, not state prison, right, at least at first? Which is exactly what the family doesn't want. And if they are not found guilty, how is that possibly a win for the family?

If the MMs decide to plead guilty in a plea that allows the judge sentencing discretion, what is a win? A longer sentence is more years they spend in a federal prison, again the opposite of what the family says it wants. Fewer than 30 years & what the judge will be suggesting is that the original plea terms were too harsh & those convicted of hate crime aren't deserving of maximum penalties.

Lots of not winning, it would seem. Sure would have been better if the family had felt listened to & respected, and to have been given the chance to speak up at sentencing, even if their preferences weren't granted.

It is not about the winning I think. It is about control of their destiny from what I can tell. I think the Arbery family wants someone else to control their fate rather these men making a deal. If they are found not guilty of a hate crime, then we can see how much work is needed in this country. But, so far in this plea deal, it has been about these men securing a better position. They controlled the narrative on the day they murdered Mr. Arbery. They controlled the narrative with the DA's office besmirching Mr. Arbery and seeing him as a thief who had not stolen anything. They controlled the narrative at the trial with the final insult being about his dirty sockless feet. I think the Arbery's want to have a say. They want to see that others control the fate of these men in similar ways that Mr. Arbery's fate was sealed by these murderers. I think the Arbery family wants their voices heard. I for one am hoping that they are heard, again and again. I see no reason that these men should have a hand in securing their placement or anything else. They have no remorse. They are probably still racist but want to be in a place that they feel more befits them. I think hard time is a really good place for them. They have shown no desire to be rehabilitated. When the gun holding murderer took the stand, he continued to dehumanize the man he shot and killed while trying to blame it all on him. I doubt he will ever ask for forgiveness or see that the Arbery family deserves an apology. So, I hope they can't choose their own fate. Let others --a jury or a judge do it. More time or less time doesn't matter to me but the idea that they don't get to make a choice or pull a string is great by me. Oh, yeah, this is just MHO.

 

[kaen]

Having watched the video fragment I'm rather puzzled. They want a full trial, so the McMichaels have to admit to the hateful nature of what they did? Even though the plea deal would have the McMichaels admit in open court that they're guilty of a hate crime? Which is exactly what they want, so why have a full trial? If they would've said that 30 years was too little it would've made more sense, but they say nothing about that.

Also, I can't help but notice that the family seems to believe that they have the right to veto plea deals, which makes me wonder what their lawyers are telling them. They seem to be setting the family up for future disappointment, especially if they give the impression that the family gets a say about the proposed transfer or that the federal judge could actually veto a transfer.

I don't think this family thinks they have veto power. I think this family has been treated poorly by LEO (to the point of Ms. Cooper-Jones was told her son was committing a burglary when he was killed --on the day that he was killed). They were treated poorly by not one prosecutor's office but two (who by the way never entertained the idea that the dead man could be a victim because they were white and the shooter was white --my opinion of course). Were it not for the fools releasing this video because they were so sure it made them look like heroes, there probably would not have been justice for Mr. Arbery. At this point, the Arbery family is going to make sure their voices and presence is known to anyone on the legal side of this. Because, honestly, the people who worked in the system (up until the GBI and 3rd and 4th prosecuting office) were willing to let murderers go free. Were it not for the man's mother, he would have been a person that many claimed had done wrong and got what he deserved. So, I give them some latitude and they have every right to demand they be dealt with respectfully and with care as they have paid an unbearable price.

 

[Hope4More]

I don't think this family thinks they have veto power. I think this family has been treated poorly by LEO (to the point of Ms. Cooper-Jones was told her son was committing a burglary when he was killed --on the day that he was killed). They were treated poorly by not one prosecutor's office but two (who by the way never entertained the idea that the dead man could be a victim because they were white and the shooter was white --my opinion of course). Were it not for the fools releasing this video because they were so sure it made them look like heroes, there probably would not have been justice for Mr. Arbery. At this point, the Arbery family is going to make sure their voices and presence is known to anyone on the legal side of this. Because, honestly, the people who worked in the system (up until the GBI and 3rd and 4th prosecuting office) were willing to let murderers go free. Were it not for the man's mother, he would have been a person that many claimed had done wrong and got what he deserved. So, I give them some latitude and they have every right to demand they be dealt with respectfully and with care as they have paid an unbearable price.

Mid-day, shortly before the judge rejected TM's plea deal:

1. The family said they had *not* been consulted about the deal.

2. The family said they had made it clear all along they did not want or agree to any plea deal, that they wanted to go to trial.

3. The judge appears to have apologized to the family, this before she rejected the plea.

 

[Hope4More]

The NYT has more details about what happened with the plea.
How a Plea Deal in the Arbery Hate Crime Case Unraveled

For those who are stuck on this side of the Times' paywall:

A. About the pleas.

1. The DOJ did speak with the family "multiple times," & knew they were opposed to the deal.

2. DOJ took a plea deal to family in early Jan (30 years, admitting guilt, see post above) shortly before State trial sentencing. The family said no, and the DOJ "shelved it."

3. By around Jan 28, the DOJ & MM attorneys had "hammered out a deal." *Before* the deal was finalized, DOJ prosecutor Lyons' team presented it to the family's attorneys.

**"They were told at that time by family attorneys that the family "would not oppose an agreement."**

4. Prosecutors held a number of video meetings with the family & their attorneys on Sunday, the day before the plea deal hearing. Lyons said it became clear during those meetings that the family was opposed to the plea deals.

5. Lyons told the judge she had struggled herself with what was the right thing to do, and while she recognized & understood the family's pain & objections, she believed the pleas served the goal of justice.

6. The judge did not say she was rejecting the pleas due to the family's objections, "and experts say she may have other reasons." (It's suggested she did so because the deal didn't allow her to exercise discretion over length of sentences).

B. More generally.

1. Federal prosecutors do not represent victims. Victims have a "reasonable right" to confer with prosecutors (check), and to be informed of a plea bargain (check), but their rights end there.

2. And, victims' interests are only one of many factors fed prosecutors consider. Bottom line, "if you are a federal prosecutor, you represent the United States."

3. Quotes ex fed prosecutor Joyce Vance, who like most another attorneys who have gone on the record, believes it was a good plea deal, including because "hate crimes are difficult to prove at trial."

Last...that the plea was made public, including the MM's willingness to plead guilty, may well complicate the ability of the feds to conduct a fair trial (because, jury).

 

[Cool Cats]

What's next for Ahmaud Arbery's killers after judge rejects plea deal: Experts

Lara Yeretsian, a veteran Los Angeles criminal defense attorney, questioned why the Arbery family objected to the plea deal.

“At this point, the family of Ahmaud Arbery is getting something that they didn’t have in the state case -- a confession basically that yes this was a hate crime. I thought that’s why they wanted the federal case," Yeretsian said. "I’m not saying they are going to be acquitted in the federal case, but there’s always a possibility of an acquittal or a hung jury. And then you’ve wasted taxpayers' money on a case where the defendants were willing to enter guilty pleas."

Yeretsian said that if the McMichaels, who have been appointed federal public defenders due to financial hardship, choose to enter open guilty pleas, the judge will have no choice but to accept them.

“A defendant has the right to go to trial or to admit guilt. Who can stop you?" Yeretsian said. "Yes, the judge can say, 'I will not accept this plea bargain or this deal,' but she can’t say, 'I’m going to reject a guilty plea, an open plea.' They have the right to confess."

 

[Hope4More]

On options for MM's & Judge Wood

What's next for Ahmaud Arbery's killers after judge rejects plea deal: Experts

1. Open plea: they plead guilty. Wood must accept the plea. She decides the length of their sentence AND where it's served (state of fed prison).

2. The MMs withdraw their guilty plea. They go to trial. If convicted, Wood decides where the sentence is served. If acquitted, back they go to state prison.

3. The MMs & DOJ make a new plea deal & present it to the court.

(BTW, it appears Roddy is slated for fed trial no matter what happens with the MMs).

 

[Mandos]

On options for MM's & Judge Wood

What's next for Ahmaud Arbery's killers after judge rejects plea deal: Experts

1. Open plea: they plead guilty. Wood must accept the plea. She decides the length of their sentence AND where it's served (state of fed prison).

Pretty sure mr. Weinstein isn't correct about that last part. When the state has primary jurisdiction over a defendant, the federal sentencing judge may not order the delivery of the defendant for service of sentence in a federal institution. Such an order is tantamount to a transfer of custody beyond the jurisdiction of the federal court. See this legal memorandum from the BOP below (p.5):

https://www.bop.gov/resources/pdfs/ifss.pdf

So we know that a federal judge has no power to order a tranfer from state to feds when the state is the primary custodian. How about blocking a transfer? Well, as the linked memorandum mentions, there are several ways the Federal Bureau of Prisons may accept a prisoner in primary state custody. First (and the one most applicable to the McMichaels), under a contract pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 5003, the state authority could request transfer of the prisoner to federal authorities with the understanding that the cost of incarceration are reimbursed to the United States. A request to transfer under a contract is usually initiated by the correctional authority of the state with primary jurisdiction. Whether such a request is accepted or not falls solely within the Director of the BOP's jurisdiction (as per 18 U.S.C. § 5003 (a) (1)). Any order by the federal sentencing judge outright blocking the Director of the BOP from accepting a transfer request from the state would be well outside her jurisdiction.

 

[sds71]

Greg McMichael won't plead to hate crime in Arbery death

 

[kaen]

Greg McMichael won't plead to hate crime in Arbery death

Guess without the potential guarantee that he spend his stretch in a federal prison he no longer believes what he did was racially motivated? This is why the Arbery family is so heated and angered--- it was not about taking responsibility but rather getting the best deal in a preferred setting. Ms Cooper-Jones talked about these men spitting in her face. This type of deal and lack of remorse is exactly what she was referring to.

“Please listen to me,” Cooper-Jones told the judge. “Granting these men their preferred choice of confinement would defeat me. It gives them one last chance to spit in my face.” Judge rejects plea deal for man who killed Ahmaud Arbery

ETA: Of course, this murderer has every right to have his case heard in a court and be judged by a jury or judge as to his guilt or innocence in this matter. But if he truly was willing to take responsibility for a racial attack on Mr. Arbery, I would think he would still want to go through with the deal but since it means maybe no federal prison, well....

 

[Hope4More]

Guess without the potential guarantee that he spend his stretch in a federal prison he no longer believes what he did was racially motivated? This is why the Arbery family is so heated and angered--- it was not about taking responsibility but rather getting the best deal in a preferred setting. Ms Cooper-Jones talked about these men spitting in her face. This type of deal and lack of remorse is exactly what she was referring to.

“Please listen to me,” Cooper-Jones told the judge. “Granting these men their preferred choice of confinement would defeat me. It gives them one last chance to spit in my face.” Judge rejects plea deal for man who killed Ahmaud Arbery

ETA: Of course, this murderer has every right to have his case heard in a court and be judged by a jury or judge as to his guilt or innocence in this matter. But if he truly was willing to take responsibility for a racial attack on Mr. Arbery, I would think he would still want to go through with the deal but since it means maybe no federal prison, well....

Of course for the MM's the deal was about getting to federal prison & had nothing to do with admitting they were motivated by racial hatred. No surprise there.

And of course AA's family want every bit of the truth about their son's murder & murderers spelled out in open court, and for all 3 to suffer as much as possible for the rest of their lives.

It's sure seems fairly likely that neither "side" is going to get what they want. There isn't any guarantee that all or most or even any of the SM evidence proving all 3 are racists will be allowed in at trial. None of the 3 belonged/belong to any hate groups. How far will it go towards revealing who they are, much less a conviction, if what's allowed in specifically about their overt racism isn't much more than the fact Travis had a confederate flag on his license plate?

I understand why the family wants more, but IMO a whole lot of justice & good has been had, much more than seemed possible way back when we first found out about AA's murder. Because of outrage over his murder, GA did away with it's citizen's arrest law and passed it's first hate crime law. A corrupt DA was driven out of office & is up on charges. Another was exposed as dirty. Who knows how much otherwise impossible justice will be had because of these changes?

And, specifically for AA's family. All 3 of AA's murderers are likely to die in prison, and the one that pulled the trigger absolutely will. All 3 *were* exposed as racists at trial, and the State *did* make it abundantly clear all 3 hunted AA down & killed him because he was black and had dared to "trespass" into "their" white neighborhood.

I believe prosecutor Linda knew her jury, and I believe her when she said afterwards that she knew the jury knew the 3 killed AA because he was black, without her having to make her case against them about race.

The federal justice system can't guarantee the family what it wants: to have all 3 explicitly exposed and found guilty of being *racist* murderers AND for all 3 to serve their time in state prison. Forced to decide what they wanted most, it seems they chose having the 3 confined in state prison. I hope if that's the outcome for any or all 3 that it comes about because they're convicted on the federal charges *and* Wood has the discretion/chooses to send them there, not because of acquittals.

 

[Niner]

Friday, February 4th:
*Plea Hearing (for McMichaels) (Federal Charges) (@ 10am ET) - GA – Ahmaud Marquez Arbery (25) (Feb. 23, 2020, shot while jogging in Satilla Shores neighborhood, Brunswick) - *Travis James McMichael (34/now 35) & *Gregory Johns McMichael (64/now 66) indicted (4/28/21), charged & arraigned (5/11/21) with Federal crimes of 1 count of interference with rights (hate crime), 1 count of attempted kidnapping, 1 count of using, carrying & brandishing firearms during & in relation to a crime of violence & attempted to unlawfully seize & confine Arbery in an attempt to restrict his free movement & detain him against his will & Travis: plus 1 count of discharging a firearm. Both plead not guilty. No bond.
*William “Roddie” Roderick Bryan, Jr. (50/now 51) indicted (4/28/21), charged & arraigned (5/11/21) with Federal crimes of 1 count of interference with rights (hate crime), 1 count of attempted kidnapping & attempted to unlawfully seize & confine Arbery in an attempt to restrict his free movement & detain him against his will. Plead not guilty. No bond.
Trial set to begin on 2/7/22 with jury selection. Will be 12 jurors with 4 alternates. Prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Tara Lyons of the Southern District of Georgia & Deputy Chief Bobbi Bernstein & Special Litigation Counsel Christopher J. Perras of the Civil Rights Division. Trial with jury selection is expected to take 3 weeks.
Trial was cancelled for the McMichaels as they reached a plea deal on 1/30/22 or not!
Indictment & Court info from 7/26/21 to 1/21/22 & State case conclusions reference post #393 here:
GUILTY - GA - Ahmaud Arbery, 25, jogger, fatally shot by former LEO and son, Brunswick, Feb 2020 *Arrests* #6
1/30/22 Update: Federal prosecutors have reached plea agreements with Travis McMichael & Gregory McMichael, on hate crime charges they faced in the murder of Ahmaud Arbery. Details of the agreement were not specified in the filing, but an attorney for Arbery's mother said the family "is devastated" by the deal & vows to oppose it. Cooper-Jones's attorney, S. Lee Merritt said he "will oppose this deal before the Court" Monday, 1/31/22.
1/31/22 Update: Judge Lisa Godbey Wood rejects guilty pleas that would have cabined her sentencing discretion (that would leave her with no discretion at sentencing & require her to impose 30 years) & tells defendants they can now go to trial or plead with the knowledge she will impose sentence & determine whether it runs with or in addition to the state time imposed. Terms of deal: in exchange for admitting actions were racially motivated, McMichaels would serve 1st 30 years of life sentence in federal prison (rather than state). The deal would have also barred the men from appealing their federal guilty pleas. Federal Judge accepts guilty plea from Travis but rejects the request to serve federal prison sentence first. Travis is now deciding if he will withdraw his guilty plea & go to trial or keep guilty plea. Judge is now giving Travis up to 48 hours to decide if he will withdraw his guilty plea & head to trial or keep the guilty plea. The judge gave the McMichaels until Friday, 2/4/22 to decide whether they move ahead with pleading guilty. Judge Wood continued preparations to summon summoning the first 50 potential jurors to the courthouse on Feb. 7 for questioning.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Gregory McMichael will face trial on federal hate crime charges in Ahmaud Arbery killing after withdrawing plea agreement

 

[sds71]

@MarilynParkerTV
Travis McMichael withdrew his plea on federal hate crimes charges and will stand trial in the killing of #AhmaudArbery
@wjxt4
Jury selection starts Monday.

 

[Hope4More]

@MarilynParkerTV
Travis McMichael withdrew his plea on federal hate crimes charges and will stand trial in the killing of #AhmaudArbery
@wjxt4
Jury selection starts Monday.

Doubt I'll be following this federal trial, not closely if at all. IMO, justice has already been served, and with absolute moral clarity. I'm not in favor of the "state" getting two bites at the same apple, especially when a full measure of justice has already been had. This country is already experiencing a sharp rise in hate crimes, and it seems increasingly likely we'll be confronted with more political violence. I'd vastly prefer the DOJ dedicate their limited resources to trying to bring the yet unaccountable to justice, on behalf of the US of A. jmo

 

[kaen]

I am not surprised either about the withdraw of pleas. On to this trial now. As a part of this forum, I always want to seek justice for those who have been wronged. I continue to want these murderers exposed in a court of law as the perpetrators of a crime that was fueled by their racism whether or not they belonged to a group or it was just home grown in their hearts. I want the same justice for Mr. Arbery when the former DA goes on trial for her actions. We have to make sure it is clear that killing is wrong and your personal bias has no place in getting justice for the victims of crime regardless of the color of their skin........ hoping that a day when that argument is no longer needed is fast approaching. I am not sure what the Arbery family wants besides to not be in this position and having their son/brother/nephew/grandson/uncle back. They can't though so we go through measures to make sure he has justice. If the murderers never publicly admit that they are racists I am sure that their words and deeds will shine a bright light on their hearts and souls, so be it. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. JMHO.

 

[Cool Cats]

Travis McMichael, man who shot Ahmaud Arbery, withdraws guilty plea in federal hate crimes trial

The man convicted of murdering Ahmaud Arbery in state court withdrew his guilty plea Friday in a federal hate crimes trial set to start Monday.

Earlier this week, Travis McMichael, 35, pleaded guilty to a charge of interference with rights that would have given him a sentence of 30 years in federal prison to serve concurrently with his life-plus 20 years sentence for Arbery’s murder. McMichael withdrew that plea Friday in a hearing that lasted fewer than five minutes.

His father, Gregory McMichael, 65, also withdrew his plea agreement in court filings late Thursday.

The hate crime case will continue against the McMichaels and William "Roddie" Bryan, the neighbor who filmed Arbery's killing in Brunswick, Georgia, in February 2020. All three men will go to trial Monday.

Brunswick-based trial attorney Page Pate said the defendants now run the risk of a stiffer sentence by going to trial.

Pate said he believes Bryan's case will be different because he didn’t pull the trigger and that the burden of proof to show he was motivated by hate is higher.

“I think he and his lawyer are saying, 'There’s no reason for us to plead guilty to 30 years, we have a chance to win the case at trial.’”

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

If this is about wanting to go to federal prison, then they should tank the case at trial and hope to lose. So, we'll see.

 

[Cool Cats]

Arbery killers’ failed pleas may complicate hate crime trial

Travis and Greg McMichael ultimately decided against a plea bargain, but not before their willingness to cut a deal that would have included admissions of guilt was widely reported by news organizations. Legal experts said it’s another detail that could taint potential jurors who have followed the case in the news and on social media.

Because of the intense public interest surrounding the case, the federal jury pool is being drawn from a broader area than typical in federal trials. U.S. District Court Judge Lisa Godbey Wood ordered that jury duty notices be mailed to roughly 1,000 people scattered across 43 Georgia counties. Some people summoned for jury service could have a four-hour drive to the courthouse.

FBI agent Skyler Barnes said in court Monday that investigators reviewing Travis McMichael’s cellphone and social media records found “frequent use of racial slurs, to include references to African-Americans as monkeys, savages and n—ers.”

The challenge for prosecutors will be to persuade jurors that such racist beliefs motivated the decisions to chase and shoot Arbery, said Michael J. Moore, an Atlanta lawyer and a former U.S. attorney for Georgia’s middle district.

“A defendant may appear to be bigoted and say terrible, off-color things in text messages, but can you translate that to why he pulled the trigger on a shotgun?” Moore said. “That’s a very different level of proof.”