The Next Trayvon Martin Case?

[armorpl8chikn]

I haven’t seen anything about a firearm theft.

December 8th
December 28 (simple theft)
January 1

Its public record, but it's not something the media is keen on digging up.
When it's all said and done, it will be clear there was a big reason they were not charged.
But...
Not before they are drug through a kangaroo court, and the prosecution manufactures some false witnesses.
It's going to be exactly like Trayvon/Zimmerman.
This:

Will happen again.
Because this man:

Is going to make sure those two.....what did you call them diaper boy? Gout infested redneck peckerwoods, will see justice, even if it takes false witness and perjury.
But some of you assholes are good with that....in this instance...right. it's for the best in this case right? Whatever it takes.

 

[jakelly]

I also don’t know why you guys keep saying brandishing. They clearly weren’t brandishing those guns. There is more to brandishing than carrying a gun.
+1 to @Dthomas3523 comment about arming themselves after seeing him. That’s gonna work against them.
I think we’re in a weird place if the guy has to be the thief for these guys to be on the right side of the law. If this young man was the young man on the videos prowling at night, I suspect they’re gonna be justified in trying to detain him. Not sure if looking like the guy on the videos is sufficient, case law precedent may have been established there, don’t know.

Ok, I’ve been looking more into citizens arrest in Georgia:

I’ll do some more digging, but what I’m finding is that a person can be detained for a misdemeanor. The law was written to allow merchants to detain shoplifters. If the crime is a felony, and the two separate instances of guns stolen out of vehicles are, then reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion are enough. If what I’m seeing so far is accurate, then I can completely understand why the first DA was so dismissive. There really isn’t any type of violation, it became self defense as soon as that guy got attacked.

 

[Rerun7]

Legal or not legal what these two guys did was stupid and cost the life of another person. Regardless of whether that person was a thief.

The older I get the more I value people’s lives over stupid stuff. I don’t care if he was jogging down the street carrying a TV it’s not worth killing people and possibly going to jail and ruining your and your family’s life over.

If the guy had been engaged in a violent crime, etc then by all means, go forth and fight evil with an unabashed violence that will strike fear in all who hear about it.

But in this case, if you want to grab your shotgun and stop “suspected” criminals in the street and shoot them dead when they resist then you are an idiot in my opinion and it will not end well for you.

And for those defending these guys action please tell me exactly at what point in their plan do you think to yourself: “this seems like a really good idea. Great things are gonna happen from this”

 

[Longshot231]

I normally agree with everything Colin Noir says. In this video he says a lot of good things except he makes the assumption that the gunmen in the video are guilty. I will admit that there some facts coming out of the case that don't look good for the defendants. However, when we make assumptions without noing all the facts then we are just like the fake news media.

Other than his assumption about the Aurbey shooting he makes some excellent points.

 

[Holliday]

The prosecutors and the media said the same exact things some of you guys are in the George Zimmerman murder trial.

He was acquitted by a jury of his peers. I guess they were all racists as well.

EXCEPT: According to Zimmerman’s testimony (hate that idiot) which was largely backed up by timeline, locations, physical evidence, other testimony, audio recording, phone records, 911 transcripts et al, was NOT attemping to apprehend Martin, was NOT brandishing his concealed weapon, WAS on the phone with 911 dispatch, WAS en route back to his vehicle after losing sight of Martin, WAS surprised and jumped by Martin, WAS having his head bashed into the concrete (deadly force) and during the struggle Martin purportedly saw and grabbed his concealed handgun.

Again this is per testimony and supporting exculpatory evidence that the jury judged to all be consistent with self defense under Florida statute. So strong was the evidence for self-defense, that the defense waved “stand your ground” and went forward on purely “self-defense” as a justification for the shooting.

I have seen the video being discussed here and there appears to be a struggle for the shotgun. It would “seem” that this will come down to the justification for attempting a citizen’s arrest under state statute. If there was none, I don’t see how the black guy is not justified in taking action to defend himself and attempting to gain control of that weapon. There is a clear deadly threat and disparity of force against him.

 

[jakelly]

@Max Why is Zimmerman an idiot in your opinion?

 

[Holliday]

@Max Why is Zimmerman an idiot in your opinion?

His behavior and actions since his acquittal (which I personally feel was the right outcome).

 

[GrayRyder]

Typically I refrain from commenting on issues like this but quite frankly I'm so outraged I can't help myself. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm not going to shoot someone for stealing something. If someone steals from me, that's what insurance is for. Based on what I've seen in this video these two yahoos go looking for trouble and they found it. WTF were they thinking? What are the rest of YOU thinking when you advocate shooting somebody because somebody is a thief or worse yet, a SUSPECTED thief when you don't even have any evidence?

Don't you people remember that the threshold for using deadly force is to protect yourself from serious bodily harm or death? Unless it turns up that Maud Arbery was carrying a weapon which he brought into play those two mouthbreathers had no right to accost him. And they sure as heck had no right to murder him. I agree with Colin Noir on this one.

 

[wade2big]

Typically I refrain from commenting on issues like this but quite frankly I'm so outraged I can't help myself. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm not going to shoot someone for stealing something. If someone steals from me, that's what insurance is for. Based on what I've seen in this video these two yahoos go looking for trouble and they found it. WTF were they thinking? What are the rest of YOU thinking when you advocate shooting somebody because somebody is a thief or worse yet, a SUSPECTED thief when you don't even have any evidence?

Don't you people remember that the threshold for using deadly force is to protect yourself from serious bodily harm or death? Unless it turns up that Maud Aubrey was carrying a weapon which he brought into play those two mouthbreathers had no right to accost him. And they sure as heck had no right to murder him. I agree with Colin Noir on this one.

If I catch someone in my vehicle they may get shot. If i catch someone stealing on my property, they may get shot. Dont want to get shot then dont steal from people. I hate thieves.

 

[GrayRyder]

Is anything you own worth a human life? On a more practical level, is anything you own worth the hell you're going to go through if you take somebody's life? Tough guy?

 

[wade2big]

Is anything you own worth a human life? On a more practical level, is anything you own worth the hell you're going to go through if you take somebody's life? Tough guy?

Your first question should be asked of the thief. It should go like this, “is stealing from someone else worth my life?”

My stance has nothing to do with being a tough guy.

 

[theLBC]

i'm not defending anyone, but i am sick of the media spin on everything.
why is this news? because it doesn't happen that often compared to the other way around.
but the media has to make every black victim look as innocent as possible to make white people look as bad as possible.

why doesn't black on white crime make the front pages? because it happens every fucking day?
/not white.

 

[MtnCreek]

The thug you shoot.

The picture the media runs with.

 

[MtnCreek]

Typically I refrain from commenting on issues like this but quite frankly I'm so outraged I can't help myself. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm not going to shoot someone for stealing something. If someone steals from me, that's what insurance is for. Based on what I've seen in this video these two yahoos go looking for trouble and they found it. WTF were they thinking? What are the rest of YOU thinking when you advocate shooting somebody because somebody is a thief or worse yet, a SUSPECTED thief when you don't even have any evidence?

Don't you people remember that the threshold for using deadly force is to protect yourself from serious bodily harm or death? Unless it turns up that Maud Arbery was carrying a weapon which he brought into play those two mouthbreathers had no right to accost him. And they sure as heck had no right to murder him. I agree with Colin Noir on this one.

He was shot for assault, not because he's a thief.

 

[kriller134]

I think most of us are just looking for an excuse to shoot a mother fucker. I know for sure I want to be a rooftop Korean. Was really hoping the boog was gonna kick off.

 

[GrayRyder]

Yeah, he assaulted a guy that came at him with a gun.

 

[ManUtdManiac]

He was shot for assault, not because he's a thief.

LOL. Truly laughing my ass off at this.

So....

Clinton was assaulted in the Oval Office by Lewinsky then...

You guys, you're so naive. In the same way that Obama was the single greatest gun salesman for years, you guys are the singled greatest source of argument for the gun grabbers. Your stupidity is the very ammo with which gun grabbers attack our rights.

You all chest thump about fighting for the 2A but you won't stop to think about how your words and (doubtful) actions harm it. It's hard to consider that you're grown men. You're just pale versions of the idiots in the picture above throwing scowls and hand signs (but probably a lot fatter...).

 

[MtnCreek]

LOL. Truly laughing my ass off at this.

So....

Clinton was assaulted in the Oval Office by Lewinsky then...

You guys, you're so naive. In the same way that Obama was the single greatest gun salesman for years, you guys are the singled greatest source of argument for the gun grabbers. Your stupidity is the very ammo with which gun grabbers attack our rights.

You all chest thump about fighting for the 2A but you won't stop to think about how your words and (doubtful) actions harm it. It's hard to consider that you're grown men. You're just pale versions of the idiots in the picture above throwing scowls and hand signs (but probably a lot fatter...).

You're the type of nutless queer that bends over and sucks his own ass to prove you love the poor, poor colered criminal to please your masters hoping they'll leave you some scraps of rights. Go fuck yourself.

 

[candyx]

LOL. Truly laughing my ass off at this.

So....

Clinton was assaulted in the Oval Office by Lewinsky then...

You guys, you're so naive. In the same way that Obama was the single greatest gun salesman for years, you guys are the singled greatest source of argument for the gun grabbers. Your stupidity is the very ammo with which gun grabbers attack our rights.

You all chest thump about fighting for the 2A but you won't stop to think about how your words and (doubtful) actions harm it. It's hard to consider that you're grown men. You're just pale versions of the idiots in the picture above throwing scowls and hand signs (but probably a lot fatter...).

Its not that funny because a lawyer will use that video to get those two guys off. Their intent wether true or not was to make a citizens arrest its hard to tell but I believe the shots weren't fired until the Black dude was beating the crap out of the White dude with the shotgun. So a lawyer will make the argument that the White dude at that point wasn't making a citizens arrest but defending himself from an assault . Not saying I'm agreeing with what happen I just know what a probable defense will be in this case and the video will be used as evidence for the defense.

The Clinton defense would of been that Lewinsky tripped and fell on the Cigar that was stuck in her vagina. Even though Clinton removed the wrapper from the Cigar his " Intent " was to smoke the Cigar .

 

[JakeM]

It wasn’t just an “assault” it was life or death if the runner got the gun, and he didn’t just blow him away it went off at first from the struggle.

 

[Tokay444]

Yeah, he assaulted a guy that came at him with a gun.

Not very bright when you really spell it out like this, is it?

 

[GrayRyder]

^^^
No, when you spell it out like this, it's called self-defense. As in, he was defending himself from the guy with the shotgun.

Somebody pointed out in that thread where that church shooter got stopped with one shot, that one of the dead guys was so close to the intruder that he probably shouldn't have tried to draw his weapon but should have gone hand to hand. Well, that's what may have happened here.

Look, I'm not saying Maud Aubrey was a saint. From his pictures, I don't think he was a Republican I'm just saying that at that moment, those two guys probably didn't have good authority/reason to stop him and then end up shooting him.

 

[ManUtdManiac]

You're the type of nutless queer that bends over and sucks his own ass to prove you love the poor, poor colered criminal to please your masters hoping they'll leave you some scraps of rights. Go fuck yourself.

"lighten up Francis"

 

[QuickNDirty]

December 8th
December 28 (simple theft)
January 1

Its public record, but it's not something the media is keen on digging up.
When it's all said and done, it will be clear there was a big reason they were not charged.
But...
Not before they are drug through a kangaroo court, and the prosecution manufactures some false witnesses.
It's going to be exactly like Trayvon/Zimmerman.
This:
View attachment 7321189

Will happen again.
Because this man:
View attachment 7321190

Is going to make sure those two.....what did you call them diaper boy? Gout infested redneck peckerwoods, will see justice, even if it takes false witness and perjury.
But some of you assholes are good with that....in this instance...right. it's for the best in this case right? Whatever it takes.

How the fuck is it even possible to fabricate a witness?

Oh, also...

 

[Tokay444]

^^^
No, when you spell it out like this, it's called self-defense. As in, he was defending himself from the guy with the shotgun.

Somebody pointed out in that thread where that church shooter got stopped with one shot, that one of the dead guys was so close to the intruder that he probably shouldn't have tried to draw his weapon but should have gone hand to hand. Well, that's what may have happened here.

Look, I'm not saying Maud Aubrey was a saint. From his pictures, I don't think he was a Republican I'm just saying that at that moment, those two guys probably didn't have good authority/reason to stop him and then end up shooting him.

Did you even watch the video?

 

[JakeM]

^^^
No, when you spell it out like this, it's called self-defense. As in, he was defending himself from the guy with the shotgun.

Look, I'm not saying Maud Aubrey was a saint. I'm just saying that at that moment, those two guys probably didn't have good authority/reason to stop him and then end up shooting him.

Big difference in them rolling up and popping a cap in some dude, and the dude Initiating hand to hand contact with them over a gun that wasn’t pointed at him. The first round was an incident, directly related to him grabbing the barrel and trying to take control. They definitely didn’t show up to shoot him as the older man called 911 when he came around the corner and was on the phone when it went down.

 

[GrayRyder]

Yeah, I watched the video. And if two guys come up to me and anybody other than me has a gun then you better fuckin believe I'm getting defensive real quick. I may not draw but I'm assuming the position and taking cover if possible.

 

[armorpl8chikn]

How the fuck is it even possible to fabricate a witness?

Oh, also...

First, the state, the court, and the DA have to be in on it.

 

[10ring'r]

Would cause way more problems that it would solve. Thieves have been thieving since the Wild West when they could be shot on sight. That didn’t stop them. It just made things more violent.

We go back to that and then the thieves just start shooting at the civilians trying to stop them.

We’ve already tried this form of justice and it didn’t work.

I'm going to have to partially disagree with your statement. Back in the "Wild, Wild, West" days, there were not as many shootings of the bad guys, as the books portray. Why? Because people had respect for each other and most knew, if you fucked with another mans shit, there was a good possibility, you'd get deaded real quick. Our society, has lost that "respect", for other people, so, nowadays, if someone wants something that someone else has, they violently take it and don't suffer severe enough repercussions for their actions. OUR society has gotten soft on criminals, and as time goes on, they get treated even softer, period. I'm not saying if the two men were right or wrong, just not enough info. at this time for me to make a call. Mac

 

[armorpl8chikn]

Yeah, I watched the video. And if two guys come up to me and anybody other than me has a gun then you better fuckin believe I'm getting defensive real quick. I may not draw but I'm assuming the position and taking cover if possible.

Are you being pedantic on purpose, or is it an honest mistake?

 

[GrayRyder]

Assuming the position means hand on gun, ready to draw. But don't worry, I'm done with this thread.

 

[Tokay444]

Assuming the position means hand on gun, ready to draw. But don't worry, I'm done with this thread.

Then I don’t need to ask if you’d ever run at someone else who has a gun, and try to pull it towards yourself.

 

[deersniper]

Legal or not legal what these two guys did was stupid and cost the life of another person. Regardless of whether that person was a thief.

The older I get the more I value people’s lives over stupid stuff. I don’t care if he was jogging down the street carrying a TV it’s not worth killing people and possibly going to jail and ruining your and your family’s life over.

If the guy had been engaged in a violent crime, etc then by all means, go forth and fight evil with an unabashed violence that will strike fear in all who hear about it.

But in this case, if you want to grab your shotgun and stop “suspected” criminals in the street and shoot them dead when they resist then you are an idiot in my opinion and it will not end well for you.

And for those defending these guys action please tell me exactly at what point in their plan do you think to yourself: “this seems like a really good idea. Great things are gonna happen from this”

Property theft is taking a part of someone’s life. The time they spent to work for and acquire the item. The time spent dealing with the theft. The time to get a new item.

Fuck thieves. They should all die

The guy in Texas tried to detain the people robbing his neighbors house. They didnt stop.
He shot both of them in the back with a shotgun. They were turned into good thieves Wasn’t changed. That’s how it should be.


If cops and DAs did their job less vigilantes would be happening

 

[Ravenworks]

I'll leave this here.
BTW, the video is from the defendant's attorney, think about that.

The graphic video of Ahmaud Arbery being shot on a residential Georgia street was fed to the media by a lawyer who was friends with the men who have been charged with the killing, according to a report.


Arbery, a black man, was jogging when he was fatally shot Feb. 23, according to police. Gregory McMichael, 64, and Travis McMichael, 34, who are white, were charged Thursday with murder and aggravated assault.

The release of the video this week sparked public outrage and led to the arrests by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, which took over the case from local police. Prosecutors called the video “extremely troubling.”

Georgia lawyer says he leaked Ahmaud Arbery shooting video to 'stop a riot'

The graphic video of Ahmaud Arbery being shot on a residential Georgia street was fed to the media by a lawyer who was friends with the two men who were charged with the killing, according to a report.

www.foxnews.com

 

[RTH1800]

Nope,

 

[jakelly]

Would cause way more problems that it would solve. Thieves have been thieving since the Wild West when they could be shot on sight. That didn’t stop them. It just made things more violent.

We go back to that and then the thieves just start shooting at the civilians trying to stop them.

We’ve already tried this form of justice and it didn’t work.

Yeah, and I remember the guys in West Virginia saying the same thing about constitutional carry. “Two old boys will be fighting over a girl at a party, and the guns will come out. People will be getting killed left and right. You don’t want some of these people carrying guns.” This was in a gunshop no less. The state passed it, and nothing happened.

When Indiana was going to allow rifle hunting, the people were told and thought the bullets would be flying everywhere. Women couldn’t do dishes in front of the window. They passed it, and nothing happened.

The tyrants around the world said we couldn’t govern ourselves, that we would starve to death, that we needed them. We threw the chains off, and rocketed to prosperity that those kingdoms couldn’t match.

If the men of this country are noble enough to take Normandy and liberate France, they can probably arrest people.

 

[armorpl8chikn]

Yeah, and I remember the guys in West Virginia saying the same thing about constitutional carry. “Two old boys will be fighting over a girl at a party, and the guns will come out. People will be getting killed left and right. You don’t want some of these people carrying guns.” This was in a gunshop no less. The state passed it, and nothing happened.

When Indiana was going to allow rifle hunting, the people were told and thought the bullets would be flying everywhere. Women couldn’t do dishes in front of the window. They passed it, and nothing happened.

The tyrants around the world said we couldn’t govern ourselves, that we would starve to death, that we needed them. We threw the chains off, and rocketed to prosperity that those kingdoms couldn’t match.

If the men of this country are noble enough to take Normandy and liberate France, they can probably arrest people.

 

[lonegunman762x51]

I normally agree with everything Colin Noir says. In this video he says a lot of good things except he makes the assumption that the gunmen in the video are guilty. I will admit that there some facts coming out of the case that don't look good for the defendants. However, when we make assumptions without noing all the facts then we are just like the fake news media.

Other than his assumption about the Aurbey shooting he makes some excellent points.

The one problem with Colin's bullshit is that he says, "running around my neighborhood". This was not his neighborhood, it was a different neighborhood, trespassing and prowling in people's yards. Aurbey could have stopped, he could have called the police and he could have filed a police report and charged those honkies with assault.

 

[Rthur]

Everyone that likes to run towards a guy with a shotgun while unarmed raise their hand...?

R

 

[Tokay444]

 

[RTH1800]

Low IQ and lack of impulse control can be a fatal combination.

 

[Rerun7]

Property theft is taking a part of someone’s life. The time they spent to work for and acquire the item. The time spent dealing with the theft. The time to get a new item.

Fuck thieves. They should all die

The guy in Texas tried to detain the people robbing his neighbors house. They didnt stop.
He shot both of them in the back with a shotgun. They were turned into good thieves Wasn’t changed. That’s how it should be.


If cops and DAs did their job less vigilantes would be happening

You can’t keep bringing in totally different circumstances and relate it to this event. They didn’t know for sure this was the guy. They didn’t see him robbing anyone. He wasn’t in their home.

I’m not on the side of thieves. I’m on the side of common sense. These two guys have screwed up their entire lives now regardless of whether they are found guilty or innocent and for what exactly?

So, just to be clear, you’d make the same choices they made and take their place if you could?

Of course not, that would be stupid. Just like their actions...

 

[RTH1800]

They may not know it was the same guy but next time they will know it was not him.

 

[armorpl8chikn]

They didn’t know for sure this was the guy.

How do you know that?
They knew for sure he was flushed from cover of a house under construction, which was the origin of the first 911 call.

This is not a "but for the grace of God go I" situation.
Mr. Arbery was not a victim. What exactly was he a victim of? He is on video, breaking into a house under construction, he is on video hauling ass from that location having been discovered.

He knew, that he was going to jail for real and for good THIS time. Look it up, he was a habitual offender in Georgia. Oh look for that law to go away after this too. That's all this shit us really about anyway. Putting black communist politicians in office, and grinding political axes for "more equality".
So...yall would feel better, if the cops had shot him? Cause that was a real possibility in this case.
So them rednecks should have let the pros handle it huh?
They had already handled the problem AT LEAST 3 times....I'm betting it's even more. Stealing guns is no big deal though huh? Stupid rednecks shouldnt leave their guns in their trucks.....
In December? During hunting season.

Dont act like you are concerned about those good old boys fucking their lives up. They aren't fucking their lives up, they got tired of being told there wa as nothing that could be done. Some busybodies with an agenda are fucking their lives up. Professional troublemakers, that dont have to live in that neighborhood.

Everyone talks peace and love and the worth of human life, until it's their property, their family, their neighborhood...shit gets pretty real then. Makes you actually use your fucking brain then...find out how fragile your little safe world was.

 

[jr81452]

Better copies of the video here: www.liveleak.com/view?t=9HlLa_1588700357
Copy of the police report here: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf#page=1
Copy of the District Attorney's here for quick reference here: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf#page=1
Link to portion of the construction site video here:

Always the same people on this site making the same biased conclusions and spouting bullshit.
Since you seemed to have missed it, the guy who shot the video was Bryan William, and he was in pursuit of Arbery with the McMichaels (DA letter page 2, section "third", first sentence).

This was not their first attempt to stop Arbery (Police report page 2 paragraph 3).

Arbery was NOT wearing boots, sneakers can be clearly seen as he falls to the ground at the 0:27 mark in the above linked shooting video. Also in the construction site vid, but that is only 5 seconds of a 3 min vid so I'm not relying on it yet (still looking for a full video).

If that is a "hammer" on the ground at the 0:12 mark, when did it end up there? I can't see any movement on Arbery's part to throw it there, and he never goes close enough to the spot to have just droped it there (why would he drop a potential weapon when these men are on their second attempt to apprehend him, and he has a clear line of site to Travis and can most likely see the shotgun by then?). You can also see a similar object on the ground 15 feet before the "hammer" at 0:08, I would guess it is a fallen bit of branch.

As for why he attacked instead of "running away"? As already stated this was not their first attempt to cut him off. At 0:13 you see him run up the right side of the truck, at 0:15 you see Travis has come around the front of the truck to cut him off, at 0:16 you here the first gunshot just as (or just before) Arbery reaches Travis.

You claim Arbery "attacked" Travis, but Travis made no attempt to keep distance between himself and Arbery, just the opposite, he moves to close the distance. You can't initiate a confrontation and then claim self defense. The fact is, if Travis had stayed in the truck he wouldn't have been in danger, if he hadn't closed the distance Arbery wouldn't have been able to try and disarm him, if the three yokels hadn't doggedly pursued the man he might not have decided fighting back was his only option. They are 100% liable for the entire situation, and are therefor the aggressors.

Based on currently available evidence, they ran a man down and ended up killing him for the "crime" of trespassing. And before you even start with that "why was he on the construction site if not to steal" deflection, as an architect with 20yrs of time under my belt I can tell you that people come onto open construction sites all the time out of shear curiosity about what a building under construction looks like.

While we are throwing out what ifs, did Bryan William cock a weapon at 0:10? Why would he do that when a confrontation hadn't yet occurred? Perhaps the three yokels meant to use Arbery for target practice and then rape his corpse. Isn't speculation fun.


Let do a cognitive dissonance check:
Say you are a black man out for a run in rural Georgia. You decide to take a break from the heat and see an open building under construction. You decide to go in and have a look around/get out of the sun for a couple minutes. Some person sees you and yells at you (reported but not yet verified). You tweak and book it. A few minutes later, 3 white men in 2 trucks (assuming Bryan was in a truck from the camera angle/height) try to cut you off and tell you to stop. You successfully evade them ("jesus, all I did was look around an unoccupied open building"). Then they chase you and cut you off again. This time 1 of the trucks/men is behind you, and the other is ahead of you (flanked). Now one of these crackers is standing in the road with a fucking shotgun. You try to run around them again but the guy with the gun is moving to intercept while "I said stop god damn it" (911 tape Greg portion).

What would you do?

Now imagine the same situation except you're you, and it's 3 "13%ers" in two hoopties in downtown Atlanta.

What would you do?

 

[armorpl8chikn]

Better copies of the video here: www.liveleak.com/view?t=9HlLa_1588700357
Copy of the police report here: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf#page=1
Copy of the District Attorney's here for quick reference here: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf#page=1
Link to portion of the construction site video here:

Always the same people on this site making the same biased conclusions and spouting bullshit.
Since you seemed to have missed it, the guy who shot the video was Bryan William, and he was in pursuit of Arbery with the McMichaels (DA letter page 2, section "third", first sentence).

This was not their first attempt to stop Arbery (Police report page 2 paragraph 3).

Arbery was NOT wearing boots, sneakers can be clearly seen as he falls to the ground at the 0:27 mark in the above linked shooting video. Also in the construction site vid, but that is only 5 seconds of a 3 min vid so I'm not relying on it yet (still looking for a full video).

If that is a "hammer" on the ground at the 0:12 mark, when did it end up there? I can't see any movement on Arbery's part to throw it there, and he never goes close enough to the spot to have just droped it there (why would he drop a potential weapon when these men are on their second attempt to apprehend him, and he has a clear line of site to Travis and can most likely see the shotgun by then?). You can also see a similar object on the ground 15 feet before the "hammer" at 0:08, I would guess it is a fallen bit of branch.

As for why he attacked instead of "running away"? As already stated this was not their first attempt to cut him off. At 0:13 you see him run up the right side of the truck, at 0:15 you see Travis has come around the front of the truck to cut him off, at 0:16 you here the first gunshot just as (or just before) Arbery reaches Travis.

You claim Arbery "attacked" Travis, but Travis made no attempt to keep distance between himself and Arbery, just the opposite, he moves to close the distance. You can't initiate a confrontation and then claim self defense. The fact is, if Travis had stayed in the truck he wouldn't have been in danger, if he hadn't closed the distance Arbery wouldn't have been able to try and disarm him, if the three yokels hadn't doggedly pursued the man he might not have decided fighting back was his only option. They are 100% liable for the entire situation, and are therefor the aggressors.

Based on currently available evidence, they ran a man down and ended up killing him for the "crime" of trespassing. And before you even start with that "why was he on the construction site if not to steal" deflection, as an architect with 20yrs of time under my belt I can tell you that people come onto open construction sites all the time out of shear curiosity about what a building under construction looks like.

While we are throwing out what ifs, did Bryan William cock a weapon at 0:10? Why would he do that when a confrontation hadn't yet occurred? Perhaps the three yokels meant to use Arbery for target practice and then rape his corpse. Isn't speculation fun.


Let do a cognitive dissonance check:
Say you are a black man out for a run in rural Georgia. You decide to take a break from the heat and see an open building under construction. You decide to go in and have a look around/get out of the sun for a couple minutes. Some person sees you and yells at you (reported but not yet verified). You tweak and book it. A few minutes later, 3 white men in 2 trucks (assuming Bryan was in a truck from the camera angle/height) try to cut you off and tell you to stop. You successfully evade them ("jesus, all I did was look around an unoccupied open building"). Then they chase you and cut you off again. This time 1 of the trucks/men is behind you, and the other is ahead of you (flanked). Now one of these crackers is standing in the road with a fucking shotgun. You try to run around them again but the guy with the gun is moving to intercept while "I said stop god damn it" (911 tape Greg portion).

What would you do?

Now imagine the same situation except you're you, and it's 3 "13%ers" in two hoopties in downtown Atlanta.

What would you do?

Oh for fucks sake.
You had me at "I'm an architect"
I'm a turd wrangler....I really am, and I know bullshit from cat shit, just by smell alone.

There's a lot of odoban getting sprayed around this stinking pile of shit.

ETA
You posted all that shit. Did you not realize it's already been posted in this thread? Um....almost like you didn't read it, but instead, wrote a long dissertation about what you think it says.
Weak.

 

[armorpl8chikn]

Oh yeah...why do you think that video of the inside of the construction site, keeps looping to just him walking in? The reporter said he was there less than 3 minutes......why isn't there more video....I mean other than that 5 second loop?

 

[Drew890]

Honest question, did the two shooting suspects have access to the live video from inside the construction site?

 

[QuickNDirty]

Oh yeah...why do you think that video of the inside of the construction site, keeps looping to just him walking in? The reporter said he was there less than 3 minutes......why isn't there more video....I mean other than that 5 second loop?

That's a good fucking question. Some alleged Republicans have been using that loop to dispel the hammer claim.,..

 

[jr81452]

Oh yeah...why do you think that video of the inside of the construction site, keeps looping to just him walking in? The reporter said he was there less than 3 minutes......why isn't there more video....I mean other than that 5 second loop?

"but that is only 5 seconds of a 3 min vid so I'm not relying on it yet (still looking for a full video)."

Reading comprehension not your strong suit?
I read every word of this entire thread (Check my likes on every page), as well as the thread on r/law and r/moderatepolitics. As far as I recall, no one had posted the police report, a decent quality shooting video, or the construction site video. Feel free to quote the posts that contain them and really put me in my place.

My being an architect was directly relevant to my anecdotal assertion that it isn't strange to get lookie loos at construction sites. But I hope being a turd wrangler brings you joy. As an observation though, you might want to find a different profession. Or maybe just wash your hands after work. Perhaps then so much bullshit wouldn't fall off of your fingertips and on to this site.