The murder of Ahmaud Arbery

[Behr]

Lol.

 

[jp1]

Right? I don't get what's so hard about this for some to wrap their heads around here. Apparently, fighting back against these two men who chased him down with weapons makes him somehow responsible for aggravated assault. I wonder if their advice to their loved ones would be to roll over and play dead.

My guess their tune would change if they had to walk run a mile in a black man shoes in rural Georgia with shotgun toting hicks chasing him down in a pickup truck. This guy is probably familiar with how history has played out that scenario in the past.

I think the truth lies somewhere in between. Obviously the 2 charged ("hillbillies, hicks, Bubba's", or whatever name you wouldn't tolerate if the races were reversed) are at fault here. They shouldn't have followed the guy or gotten out of the truck. "Walking a mile"....has nothing to do with this case. The deceased guy should not have been in the house at any time because he had no business there apparently (at least that's the best we know right now). He wasn't out for an afternoon jog. He did not deserve to die for that, however when you decide to travel that road of crime then the risk of being killed goes up.

My point is, it's easier to "wrap your head around" the case when all the facts are there to be seen with all the BS cut out.

 

[bamawriter]

- Since the video of the shooting establishes that the first shot was fired before Arbery made contact with Travis McMichael, this creates another hurdle for the defense to clear regarding "self-defense". For those who will say Arbery was "charging at" McMichael, let me just say that the citizen's arrest is out the window due to no felony, and "stand your ground" is going to be a tough sell here when you chased Arbery down before you "stood your ground". Arbery had the same, if not more right, to stand his ground than McMichael did.
- The two videos of Arbery in the vacant house were both taken literally minutes before the shooting. According to the property owner, nothing had been taken from the property while it was under construction (for whoever said something about fishing poles). He did say that his cameras had captured someone on the property in the months leading up to this incident, but there's no confirmation that it was Arbery, and in any event, no theft = no burglary, and I'm still waiting on someone...anyone...to convince me that anyone in that neighborhood knew or even had reasonable suspicion that Arbery was a burglary suspect. If you can connect those dots, GBI would love to hear from you.

These two bullet points are the case in a nutshell. Whatever their intent when they armed up and began pursuit, the known facts clearly show that their justification defense is nonsense.

 

[NurseGoodVol]

Did you notice that in the first video you saw? The first one I saw was in Facebook and I think someone edited that part out because I couldn’t tell who started the physical part of the altercation

I did notice it. It really puzzles me. It's not like the mcmicheals were going to catch Aubrey in a foot pursuit in the woods. I don't think they would have shot him had he ran away.
I'm still missing a few pieces to all this. I'm sure some things will come out in court and Georgia will have a few new prosecutors.

 

[Behr]

These two bullet points are the case in a nutshell. Whatever their intent when they armed up and began pursuit, the known facts clearly show that their justification defense is nonsense.

Do you think they armed themselves and pursued him because he had taken a gun to a basketball game one time with his gang? That would make a huge difference in this case. IMO.

 

[jp1]

Do you think they armed themselves and pursued him because he had taken a gun to a basketball game one time with his gang? That would make a huge difference in this case. IMO.

I would say that's precisely the case.

 

[bamawriter]

Do you think they armed themselves and pursued him because he had taken a gun to a basketball game one time with his gang? That would make a huge difference in this case. IMO.

Well yeah. If they hadn't, how else would their community get justice?

 

[Behr]

Well yeah. If they hadn't, how else would their community get justice?

You know, from the beginning of this thread until now, I've maintained the opinion that this didn't begin as being racially motivated. But just by some of the comments by posters here, I'm leaning more towards the possibility of that being the case. Not that my opinion matters, but something just isn't right.

 

[GreyWolf1129]

Do you think they armed themselves and pursued him because he had taken a gun to a basketball game one time with his gang? That would make a huge difference in this case. IMO.

In the 911 call he made, Greg McMichael says "black guy", not "Ahmaud Arbery". If Greg recognized him, and knew he had a prior record, why wouldn't he give that info to the 911 Center? Wouldn't you think that if they knew who he was, they would have given the 911 Operator his name?

Personally, I don't think Greg recognized him. Do you have any idea how many young black males Greg had come into contact with in his role as an investigator over the last few years?

Food for thought.

 

[Rickyvol77]

In the 911 call he made, Greg McMichael says "black guy", not "Ahmaud Arbery". If Greg recognized him, and knew he had a prior record, why wouldn't he give that info to the 911 Center? Wouldn't you think that if they knew who he was, they would have given the 911 Operator his name?

Personally, I don't think Greg recognized him. Do you have any idea how many young black males Greg had come into contact with in his role as an investigator over the last few years?

Food for thought.

Yea that was a weird 2 day flex from the media stating "OMG McMichael may have assisted with an investigation on Arbery and his brother 7 years ago, so it's definitely a revenge murder". They dropped that angle rather quickly though because it mentioned the other felons in the family

 

[bamawriter]

You know, from the beginning of this thread until now, I've maintained the opinion that this didn't begin as being racially motivated. But just by some of the comments by posters here, I'm leaning more towards the possibility of that being the case. Not that my opinion matters, but something just isn't right.

It is increasingly amazing how often I've found myself agreeing with folks like you and @Rasputin_Vol throughout this discussion.

 

[Vol737]

May be taking a different direction now....

DOJ considering hate crime charges in Ahmaud Arbery murder case

 

[bamawriter]

Yea that was a weird 2 day flex from the media stating "OMG McMichael may have assisted with an investigation on Arbery and his brother 7 years ago, so it's definitely a revenge murder". They dropped that angle rather quickly though because it mentioned the other felons in the family

You're spot on here. I never really understood why it was terribly shocking that a local investigator would have worked on a local investigation.

 

[Septic]

I think the truth lies somewhere in between. Obviously the 2 charged ("hillbillies, hicks, Bubba's", or whatever name you wouldn't tolerate if the races were reversed) are at fault here. They shouldn't have followed the guy or gotten out of the truck. "Walking a mile"....has nothing to do with this case. The deceased guy should not have been in the house at any time because he had no business there apparently (at least that's the best we know right now). He wasn't out for an afternoon jog. He did not deserve to die for that, however when you decide to travel that road of crime then the risk of being killed goes up.

My point is, it's easier to "wrap your head around" the case when all the facts are there to be seen with all the BS cut out.

If you want to sort the wheat from the chaff, here you are: A man is dead after an aggravated assault after being chased down. The two men weren't standing their ground, had not witnessed him committing a crime and had no legal cause for a citizen's arrest. Sounds pretty cut and dry to me, after seeing the video - murder.

 

[Rickyvol77]

May be taking a different direction now....

DOJ considering hate crime charges in Ahmaud Arbery murder case

Overcharging for political purposes that will further lead to those type charges being dropped. There is no evidence that this is a "hate" crime

 

[Behr]

In the 911 call he made, Greg McMichael says "black guy", not "Ahmaud Arbery". If Greg recognized him, and knew he had a prior record, why wouldn't he give that info to the 911 Center? Wouldn't you think that if they knew who he was, they would have given the 911 Operator his name?

Personally, I don't think Greg recognized him. Do you have any idea how many young black males Greg had come into contact with in his role as an investigator over the last few years?

Food for thought.

I was being facetious in response to a previous post. Sorry.

 

[Behr]

It is increasingly amazing how often I've found myself agreeing with folks like you and @Rasputin_Vol throughout this discussion.

Yea, I wasn't too sure about it at first, I felt kinda dirty, but it has nothing to do with football so I'm good with it.

 

[k-town_king]

I would say that's precisely the case.

I would say you sound like an idiot if you are serious. Some people will find any justification they can when something like this happens. He was mad a "blac guy" was on his street and no crime had been committed.

 

[Vol737]

Overcharging for political purposes that will further lead to those type charges being dropped. There is no evidence that this is a "hate" crime

Agreed. I simply don’t think there should be such a thing as “hate crime”. Invites subjectivity and the imposition of an agenda on cases.

 

[jp1]

I would say you sound like an idiot if you are serious. Some people will find any justification they can when something like this happens. He was mad a "blac guy" was on his street and no crime had been committed.

I would say that you sound like an idiot if you think I was being serious. I would also argue that this wasn't racially motivated at all, but it's your imagination, you can make it be whatever you want to make it be.

 

[Septic]

Were shotgun toting hicks chasing him when he took a gun to a school basketball game with his gang buddies? Maybe he needed protection there too?

A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

 

[jp1]

If you want to sort the wheat from the chaff, here you are: A man is dead after an aggravated assault after being chased down. The two men weren't standing their ground, had not witnessed him committing a crime and had no legal cause for a citizen's arrest. Sounds pretty cut and dry to me, after seeing the video - murder.

You can cut out important facts if you want to, but I do agree this is likely voluntary manslaughter.

 

[bamawriter]

You can cut out important facts if you want to, but I do agree this is likely voluntary manslaughter.

I think we're rapidly moving past manslaughter. At this point, I'd be surprised if felony murder isn't the charge that goes to the jury.

 

[Septic]

You can cut out important facts if you want to, but I do agree this is likely voluntary manslaughter.

Manslaughter? IANAL but this appears to meet the criteria of felony murder. If I were those two boys, I'd be stocking up on soap on a rope.


1. This was an aggravated assault as defined below:

1. The accused intentionally and unlawfully threatened, by word or act, to do violence to the alleged victim,
2. At the time the threat was made, the accused appeared to have the ability to carry out the threat,
3. The accused’s threat created in the mind of the alleged victim a well-founded fear that the violence was about to take place, and
4. The assault was made either with a deadly weapon or with a fully formed conscious intent to commit a felony.

2. Aggravated Assault is a felony.


3. "A death that occurs during the commission or attempted commission of any felony constitutes murder”

 

[Rickyvol77]

A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

I'm saying the comparison to your description of the incident is the exact same as that description, both have little meaning in the context of the specific incident