Posted on 11/23/2021 9:18:55 AM PST by ChicagoConservative27
Jurors in the Ahmaud Arbery slay case started deliberating Tuesday over the fate of the three white men accused of killing the black unarmed jogger in Georgia last year.
Gregory McMichael, 65, his son Travis McMichael, 35, and their neighbor William “Roddie” Bryan, 52, are charged with murder, aggravated assault and other crimes in the shooting death of Arbery, 25, who they suspected was fleeing a burglary as he ran through their neighborhood near Brunswick.
Superior Court Judge Timothy Walmsley told the jurors Tuesday, “It is your duty to consider the facts objectively without favor, affection, or sympathy to anyone.”
Walmsley directed them to retire to the jury room, where they began officially deliberating the case at 11:53 a.m..
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Wrong. The elder McMichael was the police, (retired) and he did call the police.
They tried to detain him, and Goober got too close with the shotgun and killed him.
They yelled for him to stop, but they did not physically grab him. He physically attacked the man with the shotgun.
Three white guys with a truck chasing down one black guy on foot.
Oh, is that why we see the truck in front of him as he was running towards it? Is that how "chasing down" works?
...it’s the stupid thug’s fault he got killed.
Yeah the long, dirty toenails are reason enough, right?
Yep.
I have been told by police officers in my own state that they are still considered to be sworn peace officers even after they retire. If this is true, and also true in Georgia, what does that do to your "vigilante" accusation?
And what exactly did the camera guy do to be considered part of a homicide? (And the father, who did not shoot anybody.)
Are you suggesting that following along and filming a crook running away is some sort of illegal activity?
A retired cop is not a cop.
They yelled for him to stop, so the **** what?
You’re right, since the truck was in front, the ****** was asking for it.
“And you know how exactly?”
Well, mostly by paying attention. A 2 second search would show this:
“But in the year before Arbery’s death, the posts in the Facebook group for the subdivision where McMichael lived portray a neighborhood increasingly on edge over low-level incidents, with residents swapping suspicions, keeping children inside and becoming willing to take matters into their own hands.”
This is a story from ABC, so not really hard to find. The only point I’m making is that this was not a simple matter of stealing a hammer or trespassing. There was a lot more going on.
Bullsh*t. They didn't "detain" him. And by "detain", I mean grab him physically. You cannot "detain" someone by yelling "stop!" Arbery was not detained, he could have continued running. He also was not "arrested" as in stopped from moving.
And the use of force was in response to a violent attack. No force was used until after Arbery assaulted the man and tried to wrest his gun away from him.
Thanks. I had read about the case when it first happened, so I didn’t know what came out in the trial. I would need a little more convincing, because on the video I saw, the final confrontation was blocked by a truck, and I also am not sure because the instigator can claim self defense only under certain circumstances.
But it IS a question of not meaning well. If these people intend you harm all compliance does is put you in a worse situation. In short order you could find yourself with them behind you telling you to go somewhere, maybe even tying you up. Yeah resisting didn’t end well. But he had absolutely no reason to believe complying would either. Sometimes life hands you a no win situation.
No they were not. Arbery was a known piece of sh*t criminal, and he was fleeing the scene of the crime. No one laid any hands on him until Arbery initiated the violence.
What you, and other people like you are suggesting is that it was a crime to yell "stop!" at a thief. It is a crime to follow a thief. It is a crime to confront a possibly armed thief. (a gun was known to be stolen from the McMichaels)
Had Arbery kept running and thus avoided getting shot, you people would argue that just sitting in the road waiting for a thief while he runs by is an illegal act.
*NOTHING* they did was illegal. Had Arbery kept running, they could not have been arrested for anything they did, and therefore nothing they did was wrong or illegal.
All of you people are so full of "virtue signaling" because the guy who was shot was black. If the guy who had been shot was a white thief, most of you would say "serves him right. He shouldn't have attacked a man with a shotgun."
But because the guy was black, all of you people are trying to rationalize why you want them punished for a man defending himself from an attack by a violent thief.
You are focusing on everything except the sole event of importance; Arbery running up to the younger McMichael, assaulting him and attempting to wrest the shotgun away from him.
Everything else is not at all illegal if Arbery kept running.
Yes
They did not stop him. Arbery could have kept running. He chose not to do so.
He chose to attack a man with a shotgun.
That is possibly true, but not for the correct reasons. The mob often gets what it wants, such as in the case with Derick Chauvin who was railroaded.
Militants are already gathered outside the courthouse threatening violence if the verdict does not go to their liking.
I would also say that the authorities are all up in arms about this case because the crook was black. I believe that had the crook been white, no charges would have been filed.
Indeed, four District Attorneys chose not to file charges, and they had to search for one that would do it. This is all about politics and fear of riots. It is not at all about justice. The Georgian authorities were so terrified, they even filed phoney baloney charges against the guy videoing the event. I think they even talked about filing charges against the guy who's house was burglarized, and the guy who called the McMichaels. They will do anything to appease the mob.
That violent crook deserved to get shot, and he needed to get shot, and the world is a better place because that piece of sh*t is dead.
Which has what to do with Arbery? Any evidence he stole anything? Any evidence he broke into any car, truck, house, or boat? Any criminal record for robbery or burglary in any other part of town? Any evidence whatsoever that he had committed any crime that deserved to be stopped and arrested for?
So that's why we see him running towards the truck? Looks like he is chasing them down.
threatened to blow his head off if he didn't stop,
That might be true, but if he believed that, he should have either stopped or ran away. The dumbest most stupid thing you can do when men threaten to "blow his head off" is to give them an absolutely very good reason to do it.
accosted him with drawn firearms,
Yeah, how do you "draw" a shotgun? I've seen a back holster in the movies, but i've never seen anyone in real life have a holster for a shotgun. Most normal people simply hold it.
and when he defended himself they shot him.
He did not defend himself. He *ATTACKED*.
He punched the younger McMichael in the head, and grabbed the shotgun while attempting to wrest it away from him.
You’ve obviously followed the case more closely, but based on what’s been presented in the media, the McMichaels by their own admission were attempting to arrest Arbery.
And based on a fair reading of the law, it’s at least arguable that they simply hadn’t met the legal burden of making, or attempting to make, a lawful arrest. That’s something that the jury has to consider. But if the jury decides that the McMichael’s were not within the law, then Arbery had a legal right of self defense. He was under no obligation to retreat, and his subsequent actions could be seen as self defense.
It’s messed up, because it’s a matter of record that Arbery did in fact enter the house under construction, and a reasonable person would infer his intent to steal something, completing the elements of the crime of burglary, a felony. But is it a matter of record that the McMichaels had sufficient knowledge under the law that Arbery had just done that? Again, the jury has to figure that out, but even with the actual language of the statute vs the jury instructions, it seems murky.
A reasonable jury could go either way on this.
I actually have real things to do in life on occasion.
Yeah the long, dirty toenails are reason enough, right?
I don't even grasp this reference. WTH are you talking about?
Newly Released Footage Shows Ahmaud Arbery Arrest From 2017 Shoplifting Attempt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAfA7OJIH0E
Ahmaud Arbery: police bodycam video shows failed attempt to use Taser in 2017 incident – exclusive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v7o_6uI9R0
Dude is bad news.
I've known a lot of retired cops, and they have all told me, "once a cop, always a cop."
They yelled for him to stop, so the **** what?
Exactly. Not detained, not arrested.
You’re right, since the truck was in front, the ****** was asking for it.
The truck is immaterial to whether he was asking for it.
A guy hitting a man in the face while trying to grab a shotgun away from him is certainly asking for it.
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.