Posted on 05/13/2020 6:43:40 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Oh good. I've been looking for some good proof that this has been debunked. Please provide a link that shows this claim of jogging in boots is incorrect.
I haven't seen anything that convinces me on this point one way or the other.
Also, what about the hammer?
We can only wish they will base their decision on "evidence."
I see this turning out like the flip side of the OJ Simpson trial where black jurors vote to convict, and non-liberal white jurors vote to acquit.
Again, I was just pointing out discrepancies, not supporting the father and son. But yes, foot ware is relevant. I used to jog around in a big city when I was younger. The best advice I ever got was ‘look at their feet. People who are actually jogging or running will need to have proper foot ware’. This was after I was accosted by a guy I didn’t know. Put his hands on me and my adrenaline kicked in so fast I clipped him on the chin with my fist. Foot ware does matter. And the videos of him walking around the house that is being constructed has him in light colored shoes, shortly before the altercation. The video of him when he went after the younger man has him in dark, high sided boots. Get new glasses.
So let me ask you this. When you see someone running out of a house that had been burglarized numerous times, does your X-Ray vision tell you whether or not the items he may have stolen is over the threshold for felony?
I was just wondering, because it would seem to me that you cannot figure out whether he stole items worth enough to qualify as "felony theft" unless you can actually see the items he might have stolen.
So you see a guy running out of a burglarized house, you let him go because you don't know if he stole stuff worth a lot?
How does that work? It would seemingly make it very difficult to ever catch a criminal.
One other undisputable fact Widburg failed to mention. Both men are in jail without bail on murder and assault charges. Playing vigilante didn’t work out quite how they had planned.
I've seen numbers ranging from 8 miles to 20 miles, and then one freeper claimed to have checked the actual addresses. He said the distance was about 2-3 miles.
No idea about the hammer. I'd just point out that the homeowner says that noting was stolen from his house.
Nah, we should just make hitting someone with a hammer illegal.
Oh, wait.
‘Gregory told police he had seen surveillance footage of Arbery inside the home stealing.’
this is not a ‘fact’; it is McMichael’s assertion...
‘If Gregory did see that video then it was perfectly legal for him to make a citizens arrest because he had immediate knowledge of a felony.’
also not a fact, as is obvious from your insertion of ‘if’, making it a subjunctive...
‘the roadblock was the second attempt by the McMichaels to stop Arbery.’
again assertion from McMichael, not a ‘fact’...
Problem being that in the video the victim is running on the left side of the street, the hammer is in the right lane, and there is no film that he threw it.
There is also the inconvenient fact that the owner of the construction site says nothing was taken - Link.
It is my understanding that in my state, law enforcement officers remain law enforcement officers for the rest of their lives. I presume this is the norm in every state.
One would think.
And who's to say this article is correct? I'll look to see if he says where he got that information, but I do know what is correct will eventually come out.
I can't see that video because my old system won't play it. It looks like the video of him walking into the garage. Yes, he walked in with white tennis shoes. Does it show him leaving the house with white tennis shoes?
And his footware is irrelevant to the issue.
No it isn't. If he's wearing boots, it means the "jogging" claim is just a lie. It may also mean he stole those boots from that house. This establishes that he was not "innocently" looking inside the house. He was there to steal.
Do you have images of his footwear after he left the house?
I believe a man entering a house known to have been burglarized numerous times in the past few months is sufficient evidence of a crime that it is reasonable to suspect one has been committed.
So yeah, they did. Just walking in is the crime.
The homeowner and the video guy are running away from this as fast as they possibly can. The homeowner has no obligation to tell the truth, and a *LOT* of reasons to pretend he's not involved.
Also the homeowner lives in another city. Did he go by the house to check, or is he just talking out his @$$ telling people what they want to hear?
Probably anything that would get stolen came from the construction people.
Pretty sure they won't want a piece of this either unless the law compels them to say something about it.
But to answer your question: Easy. There ain't no "stuff" on earth that's worth getting into a situation like these guys did that has the potential to blow up in one's face the way this one did.
It doesn't matter if he's got a big screen TV on his shoulder and a pillowcase full of jewelry, gold, and cash in the other hand.
If I know who he is, as these guys did, if I have incriminating video, as these guys claim to have, if I have neighbors who are willing to provide sworn testimony, I've got everything I need to go down to the police station that afternoon so they can get a warrant and go pick him up at mama's house. Next thing, I would call the insurance company, if he had actually stolen from me.
That is, unless I have an insatiable grudge against him and just totally hate his guts for stealing a revolver out of my truck. In that case I might be just itching for an excuse to go deal with him personally. /s
‘No, people only walk through homes under construction out of innocent curiosity.’
in reality, that very thing happens all the time, your sarcasm notwithstanding...
Pray tell how someone can know about a video of which they haven't been made aware?
The evidence demonstrates that there was in fact a video of Arbery in that house in October of 2019.
McMichaels said there was a video of Arbery in that house at night.
Did McMichaels just make up the claim of a video out of thin air, and it was just an amazing coincidence that McMichael's claim was in fact true?
Simpler explanation is that McMichael was aware of the video and had seen it.
Nobody makes up a claim of a video of which they were unaware. It's not humanly possible.
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.