The official (and only) Ahmaud Arbery thread

realist1 wrote:

They knew he illegally entered the house and went to confront him...He rushed towards them, grabbed a gun and repeatedly punched Travis trying to get the weapon which he probably would have shot them with. They fired....

I'm starting to rethink my verdict.

Is that you George Zimmerman?

realist1 wrote:

They knew he illegally entered the house and went to confront him...He rushed towards them, grabbed a gun and repeatedly punched Travis trying to get the weapon which he probably would have shot them with. They fired....

I'm starting to rethink my verdict.

Bruh bruh stop with the libel bruh. U don't want no smoke bruh.

realist1 wrote:

They knew he illegally entered the house and went to confront him...He rushed towards them, grabbed a gun and repeatedly punched Travis trying to get the weapon which he probably would have shot them with. They fired....

I'm starting to rethink my verdict.

Say that as much as you want but the GBI have already confirmed he did NOT do anything illegal or commit a crime earlier that day.

Let’s deal with reality instead of what you wish was true.

Something that hasn't been pointed out much is that he was over 10 Miles from his house. He was definitely not out for a jog.

runnerguy2016 wrote:

Something that hasn't been pointed out much is that he was over 10 Miles from his house. He was definitely not out for a jog.

Maybe but I’m going to continue following the GBI’s statements. They say that no crime was committed.

Jogging ten miles from home isn’t a crime.

runnerguy2016 wrote:

Something that hasn't been pointed out much is that he was over 10 Miles from his house. He was definitely not out for a jog.

You're making the case that he deserved being killed. The issue is that it is apparent that the only thing the father and son knew about Arbery was that he was black. That makes their theoretical citizens arrest illegal and that crime created a volatile situation that resulted in Arbery's death. These two facts cannot be denied.

runnerguy2016 wrote:

Something that hasn't been pointed out much is that he was over 10 Miles from his house. He was definitely not out for a jog.

Something that has been pointed out over and over and by those who actually are involved in the case in that of the GBI is that no crime was committed by the deceased.

Barnhill better hope this doesn't get to the Federal level beyond the actual facts of the case and doesn't move to the actions of the local authorities or he may have some significant legal bills as well.

He was 10 1/2 miles from home, he wasn't going to jog 21 miles that day. He must have had a car or getaway driver. This is getting stranger and stranger.

I'm wondering why the security cameras in the house? They must be worried about theft.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

runnerguy2016 wrote:

Something that hasn't been pointed out much is that he was over 10 Miles from his house. He was definitely not out for a jog.

You're making the case that he deserved being killed. The issue is that it is apparent that the only thing the father and son knew about Arbery was that he was black. That makes their theoretical citizens arrest illegal and that crime created a volatile situation that resulted in Arbery's death. These two facts cannot be denied.

Pointing out a fact is making a case that he deserved to be killed? What the hell planet do you live on?

GBI Director Vic Reynolds: “I can tell you that there’s more than sufficient probably cause in this case for felony murder”

He’ll know more about this that anyone on here.

runnerguy2016 wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

You're making the case that he deserved being killed. The issue is that it is apparent that the only thing the father and son knew about Arbery was that he was black. That makes their theoretical citizens arrest illegal and that crime created a volatile situation that resulted in Arbery's death. These two facts cannot be denied.

Pointing out a fact is making a case that he deserved to be killed? What the hell planet do you live on?

It's an irrelvant fact. Seeing a black guy and assuming he must have committed a crime, is not justification for a confrontation while brandishing a weapon. How can you possibly believe what they did was OK? Why were they arrested and why aren't any public officials defending them?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

runnerguy2016 wrote:

Pointing out a fact is making a case that he deserved to be killed? What the hell planet do you live on?

It's an irrelvant fact. Seeing a black guy and assuming he must have committed a crime, is not justification for a confrontation while brandishing a weapon. How can you possibly believe what they did was OK? Why were they arrested and why aren't any public officials defending them?

When did I ever say what they did was ok? For what it's worth I think they should be convicted for murder. But why can't we talk about the facts of the case? That is the point of this thread. I mentioned he was not jogging because just a few days ago everyone was talking about how this guy was a jogger out for a jog and they went for a 2.23 mile run in honor of him. But it's obvious he wasn't jogging in this case. It should be pointed out. I'm sorry if facts offend you, grow some thicker skin.

Again, they are irrelvant facts. They have nothing to do with the crime that was committed. This is what you said:

"Something that hasn't been pointed out much is that he was over 10 Miles from his house. He was definitely not out for a jog."

Why should this be pointed out?

I'm not going to repeat myself. You are some kind of stupid.

Because we should debate the situation as it was, with all the facts.

The narrative that he was out jogging is evidently not true. It appears he might have been casing the construction site.

Neither of those facts means the father/son had any right to confront him in the manner that they did. I think they should be charged with murder based on what I’ve seen.

But the narrative, like with Trayvon Martin or the Ferguson guy, that he was a choir boy when he wasn’t, ultimately only causes further divisiveness.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

runnerguy2016 wrote:

Something that hasn't been pointed out much is that he was over 10 Miles from his house. He was definitely not out for a jog.

You're making the case that he deserved being killed. The issue is that it is apparent that the only thing the father and son knew about Arbery was that he was black. That makes their theoretical citizens arrest illegal and that crime created a volatile situation that resulted in Arbery's death. These two facts cannot be denied.

SDSU Aztec - 100% agree with you. As other have said, the district attorney said Arbery had committed no crime. Whatever actions in the house that people think constitute a crime were simply not, as stated by someone who works with the law every day as part of their job. End of discussion with that. Now to what you said. You hit the nail right on the head. You didn't say this part, but let's say Arbery had committed a crime (unlawful entry into a house or burglary, whatever you want to say). It simply doesn't not constitute the death penalty. To what you said, it was an unlawful "citizens arrest" and it created a volatile situation in which Arbrey was killed. The McMichael's should be charged. I won't speculate on what charges that should be because I'm sure their are many many different charges that could be filed and at the moment I'm typing I can't distinguish the difference between say 1st & 2nd degree murder because it's been a while and I would rather not make a mistake in that regard.

Runnerguy2016 - he was 10 miles away from his house? Ok? I never run by my house because the roads have lots of traffic and there are better places to run that are 10-15 miles away. Just because he was a certain distance away from his house doesn't mean he wasn't running.

runnerguy2016 wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Again, they are irrelvant facts. They have nothing to do with the crime that was committed. This is what you said:

"Something that hasn't been pointed out much is that he was over 10 Miles from his house. He was definitely not out for a jog."

Why should this be pointed out?

I'm not going to repeat myself. You are some kind of stupid.

You should realize that I think you're some kind of stupid, but I don't point that out in stating my opinions.

runnerguy2016 wrote:

Something that hasn't been pointed out much is that he was over 10 Miles from his house. He was definitely not out for a jog.

According to this article he was "about 2 miles" from home.

So either USA Today's reporters, who likely visited his house, are wrong or you are spreading disinformation, knowingly or not.