Posted on 11/24/2021 3:55:57 AM PST by MtnClimber
Like many people, I followed the Kyle Rittenhouse trial out of Kenosha, Wisconsin fairly closely over the past several weeks. As discussed in Jane’s post on Sunday, that trial proved to be a riveting instance of a totally false and racialized progressive narrative (“white supremacist vigilante crossed state lines with illegal firearm to go on shooting spree against innocent mostly peaceful BLM protesters”) getting completely contradicted by incontestable facts (mostly videos) introduced in evidence at the trial.
But following the Rittenhouse trial has inherently meant little time left to follow another high-profile trial unfolding simultaneously in Brunswick, Georgia — the trial of Gregory and Travis McMichael and Roddy Bryan for the alleged murder of Ahmaud Arbery in February 2020.
Having not devoted much attention to the Arbery matter before now, my brain was of course, as is inevitable, heavily infected with the official progressive narrative of the situation. Here that narrative goes something like this: “innocent unarmed black recreational jogger in white neighborhood hunted down and murdered by white supremacist vigilantes for doing nothing more than ‘jogging while black.’”
With the verdict in the Rittenhouse case in, I’ve now had time to catch up on the Arbery matter. There is an extensive trial record, as well as closing arguments, all of which can be watched on video. And of course, learning the facts has proved yet again that essentially everything, or at least everything important, about the official progressive narrative is false.
That does not necessarily mean that Arbery’s accused murderers will be acquitted. Their claim of self-defense is, for reasons discussed below, somewhat weaker than that of Rittenhouse. As of this writing, the jury has just begun its deliberations. However, before reading up on the facts my sense had been that this was an open-and-shut case against the defendants. Now I would say that they have at least a 50/50 chance of acquittal.
Where might I have ingested the official progressive narrative in the Arbery matter? Well, here is the New York Times article from November 9, shortly after the November 5 start of the trial, headlined “What We Know About the Shooting Death of Ahmaud Arbery.” Excerpt:
Mr. Arbery, 25, was a former high school football standout who was living with his mother outside the small city of Brunswick. He had spent a little time in college but seemed to be in a period of drift in his 20s, testing out various careers, working on his rapping skills and living with his mother. . . . He was shot dead in a suburban neighborhood called Satilla Shores. Friends and family said he liked to stay in good shape, and he was an avid jogger who was often seen running in and around his neighborhood. On Sunday, Feb. 23, 2020, shortly after 1 p.m., he was killed in that neighborhood after being confronted by a white man and his son. . . . Mr. Arbery was running in Satilla Shores when a man standing in his front yard saw him go by, according to a police report. The man, Gregory McMichael, said he thought Mr. Arbery looked like a man suspected in several break-ins in the area. . . .
The Times itself doesn’t use the phrase “jogging while black” in that particular piece, substituting instead the patronizing “friends and family said he liked to stay in good shape and . . . was an avid jogger.” However, you can’t look very far for articles about this case in the media without finding that phrase everywhere. Examples: The Conversation, May 7, 2020, “The killing of Ahmaud Arbery highlights the danger of jogging while black.”; The Undefeated, May 8, 2020, “Running while black: Ahmaud Arbery’s killing reveals runners’ shared fears of profiling.” Or there was the Times’s own collection on May 18, 2020 of responses to its “request to readers” to “share their experiences of ‘running while black.’” One could accurately look at this last one as a very intentional effort to divert readers’ attention away from the actual facts of the Arbery case.
To understand the Times’s key deception, the important background to know is that prior to the incident the neighborhood in question, known as Satilla Shores (just outside Brunswick, Georgia) had been plagued by a string of burglaries. The repeated burglaries had particularly affected a certain property that was a home belonging to a guy named English, that was under construction, and therefore not attended in the evening and not completely secured from intruders. To deal with the burglaries, including at this particular property, the neighborhood had started a “neighborhood watch” program. Separately, English had installed several security cameras at his property.
The key deception in the Times’s November 9 piece is the line that defendant Greg McMichael “said he thought that Mr. Arbery looked like a man suspected in several break-ins in the area.” That line is very carefully calculated to give the impression that Greg McMichael was wrongfully racially profiling Mr. Arbery, based only on Mr. Arbery’s race, and without reasonable grounds for suspicion that Mr. Arbery had committed a crime. Mr. McMichael may well have uttered the quoted statement at some point. But the truth is that by November 9 it was absolutely clear that Mr. Arbery not only “looked like” a suspect, but was absolutely known to have been the very person who was wrongfully in the English house on multiple occasions. The security cameras at the English house had captured Arbery illegally entering this property at least five times, between October 25, 2019 and February 23, 2020. Greg McMichael’s son Travis — another defendant in the case and the one who actually pulled the trigger on the shot that killed Arbery — had observed Arbery with his own eyes entering the under-construction house. The video footage from the English house security cameras was shown to the jury, and also compiled as a collection of stills into a trial exhibit, that can be found in the Daily Mail coverage of the trial here on November 11.
The quality of the pictures is not great, but there is no question that it is Arbery. From a summary at Legal Insurrection of the closing argument on behalf of Greg McMichael, given by lawyer Laura Hogue:
She noted that it was incontestable that it was Ahmaud Arbery returning night after night, repeatedly caught on camera, at the same time thousands of dollars worth of property was disappearing. Did we have a picture of Arbery walking off with the property? No. But the only reasonable inference of someone skulking around another person’s home at night, with valuable property found missing the next day, is that the person skulking was plundering that property, and engaged in felony burglary under Georgia law.
A video of the full closing argument is available at the link.
The reason that the defendants in this case have a less-clear self-defense case than did Rittenhouse is that Rittenhouse had been pursued and attacked by the people he killed in self-defense. By contrast, the two McMichaels and Bryan pursued Arbery, after Greg McMichaels had observed Arbery running from the English house. Thus this case involves not just a pure claim of self-defense, but also requires that the defendants have been justified in pursuing and attempting to detain Mr. Arbery. That justification is good, but not completely open-and-shut. The defendants assert that they were entitled to pursue and detain Arbery under a Georgia “citizen’s arrest” statute. Here is the full text of that statute (via Law of Self Defense):
“A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.”
So the issues for the jury are whether Arbery was “escaping or attempting to escape,” and whether the defendants had “reasonable and probable grounds for suspicion” that a felony had been committed. In considering how the facts bear on these issues, keep in mind that the crime of felony burglary in Georgia does not require that you actually took anything on this particular occasion of unlawful entry.
I’ll leave it to the jury to make the decision on whether the McMichaels and Bryan were justified in their conduct. But however the result comes out, the narrative of “innocent recreational jogger murdered for ‘jogging while black’” is and always was completely false. Arbery absolutely did enter the English house illegally on multiple occasions, and Ms. Hogue is completely right that the only reasonable inference is that he was the one stealing the property that repeatedly went missing. Shame on me for reading the New York Times and uncritically thinking there might be some truth to what they were reporting.
And this explains a lot. Some of us are wilting flowers.
I do not know what you know about the case, but I do know what I know about the case, and from the base of knowledge I have, I can only explain your position as being one of either ignorance or bad reasoning.
Both are a very common problem in the world today, not just with Juries but with politicians, "news" people, and even medical people who are pushing the experimental gene therapy while calling it a "vaccine."
People don't do due diligence. They leap to an opinion and keep it despite facts that emerge later.
I originally thought the McMichaels were in the wrong, (based on the crap spewed by the news liars) and then I looked at the information available.
This verdict is about fear, and I predicted that it might go this way precisely because people are afraid.
And you managed to outsmart them eh? Nothing about the fact that they are lawyers and knowledgeable gave you the impression that you might be going the wrong direction?
Well, we will not agree, obviously. From the testimony I read to the live video I watched, I made up my own mind.
Life goes on.
I was on a death penalty jury one time. It was 10-2 innocent/guilty. I was one of two guilty votes. I can tell you that logic is in short supply in society in my observation. The other 10 were hopping mad when they found out the other things the perp had done (just not in this specific crime) just before the judge dismissed us. Radio reports today still refer to Aubry as the black jogger in the white neighborhood.
I have been discussing this case since the first time it made national headlines (a year or so ago) and I am flummoxed by all the bad information people keep repeating, the lack of knowledge of important particulars, and the extremely poor reasoning ability, and that's just on Free Republic!
I thought that conservatives would be rational and knowledgeable, but I find many to be just as knee jerk and reactionary as liberals are.
And as you said, they swallow the line of liberal media crap that is fed to them and they don't even realize they have been fed false premises.
Radio reports today still refer to Aubry as the black jogger in the white neighborhood.
When I first heard of this case, I thought those guys were completely in the wrong, but after looking at the information which the media didn't tell us, it is now clear to me those guys should be seen as heroes. They did exactly the right thing, but the political winds were completely against them and the media lie machine went to work poisoning the minds of the people.
And of course, a lot of people who make up juries nowadays are gullible and only want to go along with the crowd.
It is a crap shoot whether you get a good jury or not.
Not even close!
“ and rushed the father (LEO).”
NO sir. The elder McMicheals was in the back of the truck.
Really?
“ There was someone following Arbery filming him”
You mean the third defendant! He was also convicted.
No, this statement is also not correct !
“ The retired LEO and his son were video taped parked pointed the wrong direction partway off the road near the only entrance/exit to the community.”
The entrance was further back, about a mile. They are parked in the loop. If the defendant had turned around (except he was being chased from that direction) he could have run back around the loop and out of the neighborhood without approaching them at all.
Seriously ? How could you get this fact wrong !
“The Retired LEO was standing outside the vehicle on the driver side.“
The elder was standing in the back of the truck.
Not correct here either.
“.His son was outside the vehicle on the other side of the road with the shotgun.”
The son was on the left side of the truck and a few feed in front at first. But as Arbery passes, he moves right in front of the truck and approaches Arbery - with his gun aimed at him.
Charged them? Seriously?!?
“Arbury charged them dropping something like a hammer on the side of the road and rushed the father (LEO)”
Try again.
There were THREE shots.
“The shotgun fired once at what looked to be just in the air and again hitting Arbury. There may have been another shot too, I don’t remember.”
And shotguns don’t just fire - a person has to pull the trigger. A better description would be that the son McMicheal shot Arbery three times.
If you don’t know, keep silent.
“ The truck maay have passed Arbury at some point, I don’t know that. “
They were not police !
“I can see why police just let looters loot, burn and sometimes kill. Too much risk in stopping it these days.”
its tough out there....
I am sure that the victim grabbed the rifle but its a moot point....those guys were out looking for trouble and they found it....
like Rittenhouse, we have to stop putting ourselves in bad situations even with the best of intentions...
You don't know what the hell you're talking about. The reverses-course part is not the last time that's on video but but the previous time (according to testimony). As for running straight at him and plenty of room to go to the side, that can be seen on the video. Look at the video -- VIEWER WARNING: Uncut video of confrontation, shooting of Ahmaud Arbery (News4JAX).
I just heard Giuliani on the radio saying something to the effect that they've been after this guy all this time, and then when there's no video, they claim he charged them. He either doesn't know there's video that shows what happened, or hasn't paid enough attention to it to see Arbery, on the right side of the truck with nobody in front of him, turn sharply to his left and charge at Travis, who had remained on the left side of the truck.
>> Excellent summation.<<
Thanks.
I don't know. Unfortunately there are no newspapers that would print that.
Someone should look at the NIBRS/UCR data. I'll see if the 2020 data is available as I only have from 1991 to 2019. My guess is going to be yes.
Verdict — all guilty. What an evil verdict!
And supported not only by persons on the left but by many persons that I’ve considered my allies on the right. This is a case in which we have enough evidence to see it’s self defense right in front of us, and they don’t even pay attention to it.
I got an explanation from EE Gator that explains it somewhat. In today's political climate, you have to be insane to go after a black guy for anything, and these guys were therefore reckless for doing it.
I think that is the unspoken opinion driving a lot of people's opinions here. I think everyone is saying in their own mind, "Don't you know you can't dare to do anything about a black criminal"?
A lot of them think those men deserve a guilty verdict for being so stupid as to not understand the politics involved.
I know it is a crap shoot. I have come too close to shooting in self defense twice and was too close to being in a mass shooting once (while unarmed). All the idiot arm chair t-ball players have no idea what it is like when you don’t have any idea what the other people are up to until it is long after the fact. If someone places you in a bad situation it is their bad, not yours.
Sorry but other than trespassing, Arbery did nothing wrong. Arbery tried to take the gun away because the goober was approaching him with the gun drawn.
The truth is that he was murdered by 3 rednecks. That’s the way the jury saw it
"Goober", "rednecks" -- your prejudice has been noted. You don't know the facts. Travis remained on the left side of the truck, and Arbery -- with nobody blocking his way and an open path of escape in front of him -- chose to turn sharply to his left and charge Travis: -- VIEWER WARNING: Uncut video of confrontation, shooting of Ahmaud Arbery (News4JAX). .
If you are going to do something, no videos, no evidence, no body, and Bleach...
>> A lot of them think those men deserve a guilty verdict for being so stupid as to not understand the politics involved. <<
Yes, it’s sad. They don’t care about justice. Most of them don’t have a clue about what really happened and won’t bother to find out.
The narrative that three rednecks murdered a black man was what the liberal media said from the beginning, and it even poisons the minds of people on this forum who ought to know better.
+1.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.