The official (and only) Ahmaud Arbery thread

Armstronglivs wrote:

Bryan being joined as one of the defendants in the case will be the result of evidence that shows he cooperated with the other accused in the events that led to Arbery's death. He was not a bystander or an observer. That it took some additional time to bring charges against him suggests that there was no single compelling item of evidence but rather that it was a combination of factors when weighed together demonstrated he also played an instrumental role. This would have required investigation to build a case against him.

Some here have attempted to form a definitive view of the McMichaels' culpability based on a narrow or specific interpretation of events seen in those parts of the video as it was made public. Chiefly, that view is formed on the basis of few seconds when Travis McMichaels leaves the vehicle and engages with Arbery. But that is misleading. The prosecutors will base their case on the events beginning with the McMichaels leaving their house and following Arbery, intercepting him and finally entering into the confrontation that led to his death. That sequence of events will have established a pattern of intent. The killing will be seen as the final step and not a moment viewed in isolation. Travis McMichaels doesnt have to have literally run after Arbery to show intent; that he simply chose to leave his vehicle wielding a firearm to follow Arbery shows a continuation of the pursuit that was undertaken in the vehicle, which is from where the chase was largely conducted. The McMichaels (and Bryan) did nothing to show a break in the established pattern of events, by discontinuing their chase. The prosecution will argue that Arbery was pursued for several minutes and tried to get away but turned to defend himself when he felt escape wasn't possible; he was effectively cornered. He couldn't outrun a shotgun.

Of course Arbery was under no legal requirement to even try to escape or protect himself - even assuming that he could have; it was his lawful right that no one should be able to interfere with him, threaten him or attack him. The culpability of the accused is judged solely by their own actions and intentions. The law attaches no blame to a victim who makes a wrong decision or commits errors of judgment. None of that mitigates the wrongdoing of the accused.

Further, there is nothing in Arbery's record that is admissible as evidence. Even the video of him visiting the vacant property would only be relevant for establishing his movements before his contact with the accused; it could not be used to show that the McMichaels had reasonable grounds for suspecting that he had committed burglaries (he hadn't) as they could not have seen the video before they accosted him and they knew nothing about him. A decision to undertake a citizens arrest cannot be validated in hindsight. The McMichaels fail the criteria of Georgia's statutes for a citizens arrest.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Bryan being joined as one of the defendants in the case will be the result of evidence that shows he cooperated with the other accused in the events that led to Arbery's death. He was not a bystander or an observer. That it took some additional time to bring charges against him suggests that there was no single compelling item of evidence but rather that it was a combination of factors when weighed together demonstrated he also played an instrumental role. This would have required investigation to build a case against him.

Some here have attempted to form a definitive view of the McMichaels' culpability based on a narrow or specific interpretation of events seen in those parts of the video as it was made public. Chiefly, that view is formed on the basis of few seconds when Travis McMichaels leaves the vehicle and engages with Arbery. But that is misleading. The prosecutors will base their case on the events beginning with the McMichaels leaving their house and following Arbery, intercepting him and finally entering into the confrontation that led to his death.

A death that didn't need to happen had AA submitted to a Citizens Arrest and didn't attempt to disarm a man holding a gun.

That sequence of events will have established a pattern of intent.

To make a Citizens Arrest.

The killing will be seen as the final step and not a moment viewed in isolation. Travis McMichaels doesnt have to have literally run after Arbery to show intent; that he simply chose to leave his vehicle wielding a firearm to follow

He was parked in the street, in plain site, many metres in front of AA when AA chose to continue to jog right up to the men standing in and by their truck and had repeatedly asked him to stop so they could ask him some questions.

Arbery shows a continuation of the pursuit that was undertaken in the vehicle, which is from where the chase was largely conducted. The McMichaels (and Bryan) did nothing to show a break in the established pattern of events, by discontinuing their chase.

Why should they stop in their attempt to make a Citizens Arrest?

The prosecution will argue that Arbery was pursued for several minutes and tried to get away

yet he never left the paved road when he could have easily ran through yards, jumped fenses, hid in the woods or behind homes.

but turned to defend himself

No, he jogged right up to the men parked in the road without attempting to get away and then charged a man holding a gun.

when he felt escape wasn't possible;

Escape was always possibly he just didn't make much of an effort to elude those trying to make the Citizens Arrest.

he was effectively cornered.

He very easily could have ran off the road to his left or right, he was NEVER "corned"

He couldn't outrun a shotgun.

Even if TM had a 32" Goose Barrel on his shot gun, AA still could have easily dodged left when rounding the curve and first seeing the truck parked in the road in front of him and would not have been hit by TM's shotgun.

Of course Arbery was under no legal requirement to even try to escape or protect himself -

What does this mean?

even assuming that he could have;

Yes, he could have easily escaped.

it was his lawful right that no one should be able to interfere with him, threaten him or attack him.

and is it against the law for someone to ask you to stop and answer a question?

The culpability of the accused is judged solely by their own actions and intentions. The law attaches no blame to a victim who makes a wrong decision or commits errors of judgment. None of that mitigates the wrongdoing of the accused.

Okay, I do not know Georgia law

Further, there is nothing in Arbery's record that is admissible as evidence. Even the video of him visiting the vacant property would only be relevant for establishing his movements before his contact with the accused; it could not be used to show that the McMichaels had reasonable grounds for suspecting that he had committed burglaries (he hadn't) as they could not have seen the video before they accosted him and they knew nothing about him. A decision to undertake a citizens arrest cannot be validated in hindsight. The McMichaels fail the criteria of Georgia's statutes for a citizens arrest.

If you visually see a person steal something and they take off running, and then return a few days later you are saying they have no rights to report that the thief is back, or attempt a Citizens Arrest? If a person enters your home and slits your spouses throat and is on security camera and is witnessed by you, and a person that looks just like the person that committed the crime in your home jogs by your house a week later, you wouldn't be able to follow that person and call the police, and/or attempt a Citizens Arrest?

Reflection_ wrote:

WE still don't have all the facts.

No charges, case, trials, nor verdicts in the history of EVER has had “all the facts”. The GBI actions are showing we have all the facts we NEED for criminal arrests in a killing. To their credit they also had all the facts they needed to arrest the guy who made the online threat to protesters. This is how good work from LEOs and DAs not connected to the suspects look like!! *Slams gavel: This comment of yours is dismissed on grounds that any additional facts at this point would not and will not change the facts already disclosed!

(For the rest of your Stormfront gibberish) A statement(s)which purposefully omits facts is not a differing opinion...it is a lie! The intent of the lie could have many reasons yet relating none whatsoever to the conversation at hand[\b]

Truth in bold above Deflector[\b]

Ward Cleaver wrote:

Reflection_ wrote:

No charges, case, trials, nor verdicts in the history of EVER has had “all the facts”. The GBI actions are showing we have all the facts we NEED for criminal arrests in a killing. To their credit they also had all the facts they needed to arrest the guy who made the online threat to protesters. This is how good work from LEOs and DAs not connected to the suspects look like!! *Slams gavel: This comment of yours is dismissed on grounds that any additional facts at this point would not and will not change the facts already disclosed!

(For the rest of your Stormfront gibberish) A statement(s)which purposefully omits facts is not a differing opinion...it is a lie! The intent of the lie could have many reasons yet relating none whatsoever to the conversation at hand[\b]

Truth in bold above Deflector[\b]

If we get the complete sound from the 30ish seconds AND the complete video and sound and we hear both McMichaels and "Roddie" ask, yell, holler at AA to stop numerous times and we hear what AA says to TM in the final seconds before the first shot would you not be willing to agree that that could and would change the outcome of this case?

Ward Cleaver wrote:

Reflection_ wrote:

Hmmm how can I put this in your language....

No! I know this is hard for you to grasp but Arbery is a freeman! He has been under no legal obligation for many years now to listen to any “catcher” nor be mindful of how he speaketh to “white folk”!!

So it is true.

It's YOU who doesn't want the facts. Why would you not want to listen to what was actually said by all parties in the video clips. Are you afraid of the truth? Are you afraid of the facts?

All I want is all the facts to come out and for true justice to be served, whomever that favors I don't care. You, however, seem to be perfectly fine with missing facts as long as it helps the one you support. Simply shameful but shows a true Relection_ of YOUR character.

Ward Cleaver wrote:

A death that didn't need to happen had AA submitted to a Citizens Arrest and didn't attempt to disarm a man holding a gun.

AA chose to continue to jog right up to the men standing in and by their truck and had repeatedly asked him to stop so they could ask him some questions.

yet he never left the paved road when he could have easily ran through yards, jumped fenses, hid in the woods or behind homes.

No, he jogged right up to the men parked in the road without attempting to get away and then charged a man holding a gun.

Escape was always possibly he just didn't make much of an effort to elude those trying to make the Citizens Arrest.

He very easily could have ran off the road to his left or right, he was NEVER "corned"

AA still could have easily dodged left when rounding the curve and first seeing the truck parked in the road in front of him and would not have been hit by TM's shotgun.

Yes, he could have easily escaped.

Varsity Lu wrote:

Ward Cleaver wrote:

A death that didn't need to happen had AA submitted to a Citizens Arrest and didn't attempt to disarm a man holding a gun.

AA chose to continue to jog right up to the men standing in and by their truck and had repeatedly asked him to stop so they could ask him some questions.

yet he never left the paved road when he could have easily ran through yards, jumped fenses, hid in the woods or behind homes.

No, he jogged right up to the men parked in the road without attempting to get away and then charged a man holding a gun.

Escape was always possibly he just didn't make much of an effort to elude those trying to make the Citizens Arrest.

He very easily could have ran off the road to his left or right, he was NEVER "corned"

AA still could have easily dodged left when rounding the curve and first seeing the truck parked in the road in front of him and would not have been hit by TM's shotgun.

Yes, he could have easily escaped.

Ward can only see that this whole thing as AAs fault. He can see nothing else. Page after page he has continued with his dribble that the McRednecks were following the law and AA was a criminal that CHOSE his fate. Disgusting human being this Ward character.

Please, everyone, just stop posting and this guy will go away. He is only continuing because he is being engaged.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Ward Cleaver wrote:

So it is true.

It's YOU who doesn't want the facts. Why would you not want to listen to what was actually said by all parties in the video clips. Are you afraid of the truth? Are you afraid of the facts?

All I want is all the facts to come out and for true justice to be served, whomever that favors I don't care. You, however, seem to be perfectly fine with missing facts as long as it helps the one you support. Simply shameful but shows a true Relection_ of YOUR character.

Here are the facts:

1) In the police report, Gregory McMichael claimed that they chased after Arbery because they believed he had been committed multiple break-ins in their neighborhood. There is zero evidence to support that claim which makes the the attempted citizens arrest a felony.

Why was Greg McMichaels "deputized"? Who did Travis see in the house under construction at night that took off running when approached? What did the first 911 caller tell the dispatcher?

2) Travis left the truck armed with a shotgun. Had he not done that, there would not have been a shooting. Not necessarily. His Father had a pistol. Also, just because he had a gun didn't mean it needed to be discharged. That was brought on by AA.

A microscopic anaysis of the video does not change those two facts and it's not possible some additional evidence will surface that will exonerate the McMichaels.

How can you state that a better video analysis and additional evidence like the sound from that video would not provide more information that may help or hurt either party??

Ward Cleaver wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Here are the facts:

1) In the police report, Gregory McMichael claimed that they chased after Arbery because they believed he had been committed multiple break-ins in their neighborhood. There is zero evidence to support that claim which makes the the attempted citizens arrest a felony.

Why was Greg McMichaels "deputized"? Who did Travis see in the house under construction at night that took off running when approached? What did the first 911 caller tell the dispatcher?

2) Travis left the truck armed with a shotgun. Had he not done that, there would not have been a shooting. Not necessarily. His Father had a pistol. Also, just because he had a gun didn't mean it needed to be discharged. That was brought on by AA.

A microscopic anaysis of the video does not change those two facts and it's not possible some additional evidence will surface that will exonerate the McMichaels.

How can you state that a better video analysis and additional evidence like the sound from that video would not provide more information that may help or hurt either party??

Replies above in bold