Jogging in Georgia while black.

[JoeMorgue]

Then challenge open carry laws. That's the problem here.

In my own beloved NJ, you'd be right. In Georgia, you are wrong.

"Hey black people sorry about dying, as soon as we fix the entire system it might get better."

And see above. Swap the races around and "bUt thEY R juST oePEn carrYIng" defense goes away.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

If Travis stopped his truck in the street and just stood by the drivers door with a gun, he was not preventing anything or even breaking a law. Maybe illegal parking. Keep in mind, on your street or mine, any of this gun-toting would be a serious crime. Not so in Georgia USA.

Having a gun on the streets down in this particular holler is not preventing movement, or threatening, or anything like that. Any assault was only in your feelings, unless Travis directed that gun at Arbery. Its unthinkable to you or I. Its normal and legal there.

Removed from context, sure.

The fact that this roadblock was part of an extended vehicle chase in which they were telling him to stop, it would be clear to any reasonable person that these people stopped in the road armed for confrontation. Mr. Arbery had already made a failed attempt to evade these people, and they persisted in pursuing him.

In the totality of the circumstances, a jury will understand the intentions of the armed roadblock quite well. A reasonable person in Mr. Arbery's situation would be intimidated by this display of firearms, and clearly this is the intention of the men trying to force him to stop.

(a) A person commits the offense of simple assault when he or she either:

....

(2) Commits an act which places another in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.

https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-16/chapter-5/article-2/16-5-20/

 

[Thermal]

Again let's take a black guy and just have him hold a shotgun but not "brandish" it on the corner of your typical suburban neighborhood and see what happens and who's defending it and who's not.

r/SelfAwareWolves

This is exactly the doublethink you're running with. You say you can attack someone holding a gun on a street where this is legal to do. You now, he might attack you. That's exactly what the white power pussies say about a black guy they think looks scary.

 

[Dave Rogers]

One day, maybe - SURELY - someone here will come up with a "... while black" story that doesn't end up being revealed as the usual corporate media spin and ************, and ISF locals don't step on that rake Bogative mentioned, lying in wait for them. Again.

No, I doubt it, it'll just turn out that the victim deserved to be shot dead because he once took a library book back late.

Dave

 

[Cainkane1]

A black man, Ahmaud Arbery, was shot dead while out for a jog in Georgia after being confronted by two armed white men attempting a citizen's arrest.

The two white men set up a roadblock with their truck and confronted the unarmed Arbery. In the brief exchange, Arbery struggled with one of the men over a shotgun, and was shot dead.

local GA law enforcement ruled this an acceptable case of self defense, despite little to no evidence that Arbery was doing anything suspicious that would justify armed men attempting to apprehend him.

Public outcry, including from Joe Biden, has lead to the case being sent over to the Grand Jury for possible indictment.

CNN managed to get their hands on video of the incident and it's hard to see this as anything but a broad-daylight murder.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/05/us/ahmaud-arbery-jogging-georgia-shooting/index.html?utm_term=link&utm_medium=social&utm_content=2020-05-06T00%3A57%3A26&utm_source=twCNN



According to GA prosecutors that passed on the case, murdering unarmed black men for refusing to explain why they are jogging on white roads is not a crime. The DA watched this video and decided that there wasn't probable cause for an arrest.

One of the killers is a former police officer.

This almost never happens. I live 280 miles west of Georgias east coast and blacks have been jogging here for decades. The vigilantes will not get away with this and they will be spending many years in prison.

 

[Thermal]

Removed from context, sure.

The fact that this roadblock was part of an extended vehicle chase in which they were telling him to stop, it would be clear to any reasonable person that these people stopped in the road armed for confrontation.

In the totality of the circumstances, a jury will understand the intentions of the armed roadblock quite well. A reasonable person in Mr. Arbery's situation would be intimidated by this display of firearms, and clearly this is the intention of the men trying to force him to stop.



https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-16/chapter-5/article-2/16-5-20/

I think a gun-toting Georgia jury might see things a little differently. Recall, this State doesn't even legislate Hate Crimes.

If it can be established that Arbery was in fact caught on surveillance, and the McMichaels recognized him, and he had just ran full speed out of the house he was caught on tape being in, I think a jury would be sympathetic to the roadblocking.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

I live 280 miles west of Georgias east coast and blacks have been jogging here for decades.

They must be getting awfully tired.

 

[Meadmaker]

I think a gun-toting Georgia jury might see things a little differently. Recall, this State doesn't even legislate Hate Crimes.

If it can be established that Arbery was in fact caught on surveillance, and the McMichaels recognized him, and he had just ran full speed out of the house he was caught on tape being in, I think a jury would be sympathetic to the roadblocking.

If all of the above were true, and allowed to be introduced into evidence, I think a hung jury would be almost guaranteed, if not an outright acquittal.

 

[JoeMorgue]

r/SelfAwareWolves

This is exactly the doublethink you're running with. You say you can attack someone holding a gun on a street where this is legal to do. You now, he might attack you. That's exactly what the white power pussies say about a black guy they think looks scary.

*Headdesk* Jesus Goddamn Christ Jabba 2.0 open your goddamn ears and listen.

YEAH BUT WHEN BLACK PEOPLE KILL WHITE PEOPLE THEY ACTUALLY GO TO JAIL FOR IT.

Benefit... of... the... goddamn... *******... doubt. That's where the racism is.

Shove the goddamn "LOL subreddit" argument.

*Tosses you your pearls* Now go clutch them because somebody got "uncivil" with you.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I think a gun-toting Georgia jury might see things a little differently. Recall, this State doesn't even legislate Hate Crimes.

If it can be established that Arbery was in fact caught on surveillance, and the McMichaels recognized him, and he had just ran full speed out of the house he was caught on tape being in, I think a jury would be sympathetic to the roadblocking.

That's a different argument though. Maybe a jury will be persuaded into a broad reading of the Citizen's Arrest statutes, and that would make the use of force acceptable.

But I don't think even a GA jury would be so obtuse as to pretend the displaying of firearms here was not intended to convey a threat. Whether or not the McMichaels were in the legal right to threaten and use force is another question.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Again if "Well let's just let a jury decide" is the answer we never would have did away with lynchings.

The actual system can sometimes be broken and the answer to that can't be "Well let the system decide."

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Again if "Well let's just let a jury decide" is the answer we never would have did away with lynchings.

The actual system can sometimes be broken and the answer to that can't be "Well let the system decide."

To be fair, a public trial at least gets this out from the cover-up. A corrupt trial is still much more transparent than a corrupt DA hand-waving the whole case away.

But yeah, there is a nasty history of jury nullification of horrific violence against Black people in the South. I could easily see there being a one or even multiple holdout jurors that result in a mistrial.

 

[JoeMorgue]

To be fair, a public trial at least gets this out from the cover-up. A corrupt trial is still much more transparent than a corrupt DA hand-waving the whole case away.

Oh it would certainly be a step toward better, it just wouldn't be a solution.

But yeah, there is a nasty history of jury nullification of horrific violence against Black people in the South. I could easily see there being a one or even multiple holdout jurors that result in a mistrial.

That's why I'm not a huge fan of jury nullification. Too much of the mythology around it is all about the whole "But just think... you could overturn unjust laws just acting as a citizen" and doesn't address the "Yeah but the exact opposite is equally possible" elephant in the room.

 

[Bob001]

I think a gun-toting Georgia jury might see things a little differently. Recall, this State doesn't even legislate Hate Crimes.

If it can be established that Arbery was in fact caught on surveillance, and the McMichaels recognized him, and he had just ran full speed out of the house he was caught on tape being in, I think a jury would be sympathetic to the roadblocking.

Those are a lot of ifs. But civilians don't get to play junior deputy. And if in fact the McMichaels recognized Arbery -- a claim neither they nor their defenders have made -- that completely undercuts any grounds for them to do anything, let alone chase him down, confront him and kill him. They could have called the cops and said "I know that guy, I've dealt with him before, he's the guy I saw running out of the house." Period.

 

[Thermal]

That's a different argument though. Maybe a jury will be persuaded into a broad reading of the Citizen's Arrest statutes, and that would make the use of force acceptable.

But I don't think even a GA jury would be so obtuse as to pretend the displaying of firearms here was not intended to convey a threat. Whether or not the McMichaels were in the legal right to threaten and use force is another question.

I don't think Citizens Arrest will be used. They'll lose that, and fast. I think they'll just go with 'wanted to talk with him about what he is doing repeatedly being on their neighbors private property without permission' and they are open carrying as they can legally and frequently do.

I would hope that a jury sees that as intimidation with a weapon, and aggravated assault. But im not laying money on it.

 

[Thermal]

*Headdesk* Jesus Goddamn Christ Jabba 2.0 open your goddamn ears and listen.

YEAH BUT WHEN BLACK PEOPLE KILL WHITE PEOPLE THEY ACTUALLY GO TO JAIL FOR IT.

Benefit... of... the... goddamn... *******... doubt. That's where the racism is.

Shove the goddamn "LOL subreddit" argument.

*Tosses you your pearls* Now go clutch them because somebody got "uncivil" with you.

Your argument is that a black guy can attack someone that they think is a threat, but your panties get in a bunch when a white guy does the same to a black guy. That's racist!

This is just surreal.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

*Headdesk* Jesus Goddamn Christ Jabba 2.0 open your goddamn ears and listen.

YEAH BUT WHEN BLACK PEOPLE KILL WHITE PEOPLE THEY ACTUALLY GO TO JAIL FOR IT.
Benefit... of... the... goddamn... *******... doubt. That's where the racism is.

Shove the goddamn "LOL subreddit" argument.

*Tosses you your pearls* Now go clutch them because somebody got "uncivil" with you.

You're engaged in enormous context denial.

Black people and white people aren't just interchangeable "citizenry units" colored differently. In our society, they have wildly different behavioral profiles / crime rates / lifestyles, etc.

Even if a computer that was programmed to be incapable of taking race into account or even knowing race existed - was determining the outcome of all school discipline, all criminal cases, etc. - you would still see these same disparities because the FACTS of these cases are different not just on average, but OVERWHELMINGLY so.

So whites very frequently have a legitimate basis to shoot a black person who is criminally attacking them, whereas the reverse almost doesn't happen ever.

White people preying on black people as targets for burglary, rape, murder, mugging - etc. is almost not a thing at all. The reverse is a massive phenomenon.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I don't think Citizens Arrest will be used. They'll lose that, and fast. I think they'll just go with 'wanted to talk with him about what he is doing repeatedly being on their neighbors private property without permission' and they are open carrying as they can legally and frequently do.

I would hope that a jury sees that as intimidation with a weapon, and aggravated assault. But im not laying money on it.

I think the fact that the roadblock wasn't their first run-in with Arbery is very damning.

By their own statements, the vigilantes state that Arbery was evading them. Before the filmed final encounter, there was another attempt to force a confrontation that ended in Arbery evading on foot. At this point, there is really no room for a "big misunderstanding" argument. This person was fleeing from them, and they gave chase.

Obviously Arbery was not voluntarily going to agree to their "talk". For them to set up their armed roadblock was an obvious escalation. Any half-competent prosecutor will take the jury through this step-by-step, not just focusing on the video taped part exclusively.

 

[Thermal]

Those are a lot of ifs. But civilians don't get to play junior deputy. And if in fact the McMichaels recognized Arbery -- a claim neither they nor their defenders have made -- that completely undercuts any grounds for them to do anything, let alone chase him down, confront him and kill him. They could have called the cops and said "I know that guy, I've dealt with him before, he's the guy I saw running out of the house." Period.

My guess is that English told his neighbors that a black guy was caught repeatedly on surveillance video in his house, and told the McMichaels and other neighbors about it. So when Arbery is seen sprinting out of the house, they want to talk to him. Not Citizens Arrest, just keep him in sight till the cops arrive. I can see that.

The problem comes with open carry. To me, that is naked intimidation under the circumstances. In Georgia, it's a common and legal choice. What we see as a clear threat is what you see on a Georgia street any day.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

At the time of the struggle, there is no doubt that a reasonable person in either of their situations would perceive that their lives were in danger, and lethal force was justified.

I think that's true of Arbrey's situation. But when you're one of a three-man posse, with two of you armed? I don't think that then it's reasonable to fear for your life if an unarmed man tries to take your gun off you.

I can see someone who is scared of black people panicking, but as I've said before I don't think that being racist should be a valid defence in situations like these.