2-Gregory was concerned about crime in the neighborhood, and may have seen a video of Arbery last year. Perhaps that's significant, could contribute to the aforementioned bias. Has no bearing on the events of the day.
3-His son had a weapon stolen the prior month. I don't know if there's any actual evidence Arbery was the thief, I've only seen speculation. Bias on Travis' part though, leading to the incorrect assumption that Arbery was armed.
4-Arbery put something in his pants at night. McMichaels assumed it was a weapon? Zero evidence. Thus his and his son's actions on the day in question resulting in the death of an individual with no weapon, much less Gregory's .357. An aside, don't mean to be too critical of Freepers who keep weapons in their car, but consider investing in a safe. When I' can't carry in a particular location my weapon is always locked in a handgun safe in my locked car. Yes, a theif can still steal it, more likely the safe, but he won't be shooting me with my weapon as I return to the car. And if he left his handgun in his glove compartment in his driveway as is my impression, he's not only foolish but it brings into question his concerns about neighborhood burglaries.
5-I don't know how the hammer got there. If the video shows he threw it down before approaching the truck, a shame the McMichaels didn't notice he apparently disarmed himself. Obviously we don't know how it got there.
6-He may well have been in better physical shape than either of the McMichael's. As I understand it there's no question that the McMichaels were armed legally. The issue will be what they did with their arms which resulted in a death.
Half a dozen valid reasons why the McMichaels should have been armed in an encounter with Arbery. Largely irrelevant, the question will be Gregory's actions. I've no doubt being confronted by Arbery attempting to grab his shotgun he was in fear of his life. Which is irrelevant unless the McMichaels were legallly justified in stopping and attempting to detain Arbery. Which none of your points address. They'll go to jail or be set free on that. Whether they had probable cause to attempt a citizen's arrest. And although I know you're sympathetic to the McMichaels, every point you made simply establishes McMichaels probable bias. What will be important will be the facts of the day. All I get from all the posts is that he may have trespassed in a house under construction, and perhaps stole a hammer, which he dropped, though there's no evidence of that, and it wouldn't rise to criminal tresspass. I think they'll need a very good lawyer to establish it was a legitimate citizens arrest.
I have some sympathy once Travis was attacked, but I won't be surprised that in the end it's determined he had no cause to attempt the detention. Should have let the police do their job.
They were meant to address the reason as to why these two men would want to be armed in a confrontation with Arbery, and I think they did that splendidly.
And although I know you're sympathetic to the McMichaels, every point you made simply establishes McMichaels probable bias.
I'm not sure "sympathetic" is the right word. Part of me feels they were foolish to do what they did, and to some extent deserved the blood lust baying after them now. Pretty much anyone knows you have to treat black criminals as a "special case". Treating them equally as you would a white criminal will get you in trouble.
So no, not "sympathetic", more like seeing them as a bone of contention in a larger societal problem.
And "bias"? I'm not sure of your point here. I don't see how any personal animosity directed at this individual would have been likely to have changed their response. I suspect they would have done the same no matter who the trespasser\probable thief turned out to be.
I think they'll need a very good lawyer to establish it was a legitimate citizens arrest.
Presumably the DA (Barnhill) was a "very good lawyer" and he said it was legitimate. Freeper "Bort" has said he is over 30 years a criminal lawyer in Georgia and he insists they had legitimate cause to detain Arbery. I'm sure if you talk to Benjamin Crump he will disagree, but from what i've seen of him, I don't think he is a very good lawyer. He's an exploiter.
I have some sympathy once Travis was attacked, but I won't be surprised that in the end it's determined he had no cause to attempt the detention.
Show me the jury and I will tell you the likely verdict. I don't think this is about law. It was about law back in February, now it is a political show trial.