• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Jogging in Georgia while black.

Status
Not open for further replies.
TragicMonkey said:
This one seems even worse. "He fought back when we tried to murder him, so we feared for our lives!"
Click to expand...

"we tried to scare this black guy into never coming to our neighborhood again, but he fought back so we had to shoot him"
 
I have also not seen the video, but a report I read says that the video pretty unequivocally shows that a shot was fired before the altercation in which the man was then murdered.

It is this initial shot at the jogger while he was jogging that changes this case from an arrest gone wrong to an outright murder, if not a lynching.

The first report I saw of this suggested that there would be no prosecution, but I see from the one cited here that this case will now be sent to a grand jury. Thank goodness for eyewitness videos to counteract the outright lies of the police.

I think Bogative is all wet here. There is plenty of evidence that this was an unlawful act on the part of the shooters, that the victim was innocent, and that the police initially lied about the incident. Even if you can't see the video, others surely have, including, apparently, Georgia television viewers. The decision of the DA to prosecute, and the Governor to provide resources, should, I think, be given due weight.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
My comment about "white road" comes from a quote from the 911 call.

The dispatcher asked what Arbery was doing to be warrant apprehension, and the response was

"He's a black guy running down our road".
Click to expand...

Not busting your chops about 'white road's. You know how a small editorializing can shift a narrative. It's not like they made such a claim, which would be shocking to say the least.

I'm inclined to think this was an ex cop who still thought he was a cop. I'd also like to know what this description was that Arbery was said to match. 'Big black guy', maybe? Not remotely good enough to start brandishing shotguns. Sounds like an ex cop who thinks black guy's are second class citizens who are all 'suspects' till proven not shot.
 
The "I feared for my life" card is legit in some (perhaps many or even most) context. I'm fully on team "It's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6."

But you can't put yourself, either intentionally or through your own stupidity/ignorance, into situations where people are going to reasonably react to your actions and then pull the "I feared for my life" card on their reasonable reactions.

Someone is going to react to a pump of people jumping out of their truck and dogpiling them while they are out going for a job. You cannot use that response (at least soley) for the "OMG I feared for my life" excuse.

Otherwise white people are just going to keep screwing with black people and when black people get angry for being screwed it, killing them because their anger made them "fear for their life."
 
bruto said:
I have also not seen the video, but a report I read says that the video pretty unequivocally shows that a shot was fired before the altercation in which the man was then murdered.

It is this initial shot at the jogger while he was jogging that changes this case from an arrest gone wrong to an outright murder, if not a lynching.

The first report I saw of this suggested that there would be no prosecution, but I see from the one cited here that this case will now be sent to a grand jury. Thank goodness for eyewitness videos to counteract the outright lies of the police.

I think Bogative is all wet here. There is plenty of evidence that this was an unlawful act on the part of the shooters, that the victim was innocent, and that the police initially lied about the incident. Even if you can't see the video, others surely have, including, apparently, Georgia television viewers. The decision of the DA to prosecute, and the Governor to provide resources, should, I think, be given due weight.
Click to expand...

I've watched the video. As Arbery runs past the armed roadblock, the driver with the shotgun approaches him and Arbery turns sharply and charges him to wrestle over the shotgun.

I think it's still murder regardless of whether the man only shot after Arbery attacked him. They set up an armed roadblock and were brandishing firearms while demanding he stop. Arbery has a clear self-defense claim as an unarmed man on foot being chased by armed men in a truck. Arbery would have been justified to kill both of them had he the means. In a better world, he would have successfully wrestled the shotgun away and killed them both.
 
Thermal said:
Not busting your chops about 'white road's. You know how a small editorializing can shift a narrative. It's not like they made such a claim, which would be shocking to say the least.

I'm inclined to think this was an ex cop who still thought he was a cop. I'd also like to know what this description was that Arbery was said to match. 'Big black guy', maybe? Not remotely good enough to start brandishing shotguns. Sounds like an ex cop who thinks black guy's are second class citizens who are all 'suspects' till proven not shot.
Click to expand...

You may be technically right that they did not say "white roads," but it might depend a little on whether "our road" has any blacks on it. If an unidentified black man, labelled by his blackness, is considered an invader on "our road" it is pretty obvious that "our road" is not one frequented by black people.

I know you sometimes consider non-racist as the default position unless there's other proof, a position that's often unpopular and sometimes right, but I think in this case it's reasonable to presume the reverse.
 
TragicMonkey said:
This one seems even worse. "He fought back when we tried to murder him, so we feared for our lives!"
Click to expand...

The sad, scary part is you're not joking.

"What kind of world do we live in where decent God fearing gun-toting white people can't even murder an unarmed black person, in broad daylight with a 2 on 1 advantage, without fearing for our lives?"
 
JoeMorgue said:
It's gonna be the "LOL I went into the wrong apartment, oopsie daisy then I feared for my life" argument again.
Click to expand...

Quite so.

I have found the rationale goes along like this:

I made a mistake in thinking that the guy I killed was actually a guy that was going to kill/hurt me.

As a result, I killed him before he could possibly demonstrate his innocence because when I killed him I was still thinking that going to kill/hurt me.

Therefore, this is clear case of self-defense because when I killed him, I really did think that he was going to kill/hurt me.

I do not know how people get away with this crap, but they do all the time.
 
bruto said:
You may be technically right that they did not say "white roads," but it might depend a little on whether "our road" has any blacks on it. If an unidentified black man, labelled by his blackness, is considered an invader on "our road" it is pretty obvious that "our road" is not one frequented by black people.

I know you sometimes consider non-racist as the default position unless there's other proof, a position that's often unpopular and sometimes right, but I think in this case it's reasonable to presume the reverse.
Click to expand...

As Ron Obvious noted above, there is a world of difference.

'On our road, the one on which we live, we haven't seen a black man in 50 years, except for a recently reported burglary suspect'

is quite a bit different from

'This is a white road, where we gun down darkies'

The rednecks are in the wrong either way, but very different in motivations. The devil is in the spin.
 
Thermal said:
As Ron Obvious noted above, there is a world of difference.

'On our road, the one on which we live, we haven't seen a black man in 50 years, except for a recently reported burglary suspect'

is quite a bit different from

'This is a white road, where we gun down darkies'

The rednecks are in the wrong either way, but very different in motivations. The devil is in the spin.
Click to expand...

Really splitting the racism hair here. Arbery is black, and since we live in a neighborhood with only white folk, he must be the same black man we suspect is committing crimes in the area. Even if these guys aren't klan members, clearly they were making some assumptions about Arbery based on him being a black man. These assumptions, combined with their DIY approach to law enforcement, lead to his death.

I have a feeling that Arbery matched the description of the suspect in the same way that all young black men fit the description of the suspect.
 
Last edited:
BobTheCoward said:
How is one supposed to make a citizens arrest if the person doesn't stop?
Click to expand...

Why is someone supposed to make a citizens arrest in the absence of a crime?

Could an actual cop have arrested Arbery for anything?

No crime = no cause for arrest, citizen or LEO. The rednecks waved their guns around. Arbery took a run at shotgun boy. This was not ending well in any scenario.
 
Thermal said:
Why is someone supposed to make a citizens arrest in the absence of a crime?

Could an actual cop have arrested Arbery for anything?

No crime = no cause for arrest, citizen or LEO. The rednecks waved their guns around. Arbery took a run at shotgun boy. This was not ending well in any scenario.
Click to expand...

I have no opinion on your first question.

As to your second question, cops are generally protected if they arrest someone for a suspected crime that they incorrectly suspect.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I have no opinion on your first question.

As to your second question, cops are generally protected if they arrest someone for a suspected crime that they incorrectly suspect.
Click to expand...

Citizens arrest is widely understood to be a legally risky proposition. Private citizens are not granted the same broad immunity to make mistakes of fact like the police.

A private citizen is facing a lot more strict liability than a cop.
 
Last edited:
"I came home and found this person breaking into my house, I'm going to hold him until the police come" is one thing.

"Somebody broke into my house so and my neighbor said the guy was looked like this one guy so I went to this one guys house with a shotgun to arrest him" is a whole 'other.

And even the first one is questionable.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
What was the description, and did he really match it? In more than skin colour, I mean.
Click to expand...

According to the statement given to the responding police officer, they claimed to recognize Arbery from a security camera footage of previous nighttime break-ins.

There is no indication that anyone thought that Arbery was fleeing a fresh crime. They spotted him running down the road and thought it was their guy from "the other night" and gave chase.

The police record: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/6915-arbery-shooting/b52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf

I can't see how this meets the requirements for citizens arrest. They did not witness Arbery committing a crime when they decided to chase him.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
Citizens arrest is widely understood to be a legally risky proposition. Private citizens are not granted the same broad immunity to make mistakes of fact like the police.

A private citizen is facing a lot more strict liability than a cop.
Click to expand...

So far, these clowns have faced no liability at all, with the cops prosecutors doing backflips to let them off the hook. It's George Zimmerman all over again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom