Jogging in Georgia while black.

[Darat]

I was surprised at the Roddie charge myself. What we have seen so far doesn't seem to me to justify a felony charge. However, the police have seen more. It may very well be that he used his car as a deadly weapon in a threatening manner.

Why were you surprised? From the initial statement according to McMichae1 (sic) he was as involved as they were - from the police report:

"....McMichae1 stated the unidentified male turned around and began running back the direction from which he came and " Roddy" attempted to block him which was unsuccessful.... "

 

[IsThisTheLife]

Agreed. There is no concept of carrying for self defense. Aggression only.

Maybe. But we still don't know what the McMichaels already knew about Arbery. If they were at all aware of his penchant for threatening and aggressive behaviour, even with cops, they might have figured that they needed to be armed to intimidate him into acquiescence. And they'd have been right, but even that wasn't enough to stop the dumb bastard attacking them.

From the bodycam footage we've seen he was manifestly an unbalanced thug who'd be triggered in an instant into losing what little capacity he had for self-restraint - what would go through your mind running into someone dressed like him and with his demeanour (particularly in a secluded area), the low pants and boxers/basketball pants sticking out, bare-chested under a parka on a warm spring/summer's day?

 

[lionking]

Maybe. But we still don't know what the McMichaels already knew about Arbery. If they were at all aware of his penchant for threatening and aggressive behaviour, even with cops, they might have figured that they needed to be armed to intimidate him into acquiescence. And they'd have been right, but even that wasn't enough to stop the dumb bastard attacking them.

From the bodycam footage we've seen he was manifestly an unbalanced thug who'd be triggered in an instant into losing what little capacity he had for self-restraint - what would go through your mind running into someone dressed like him and with his demeanour (particularly in a secluded area), the low pants and boxers/basketball pants sticking out, bare-chested under a parka on a warm spring/summer's day?

This is the longest collections of euphemisms for the word “black” I’ve ever seen. Congratulations.

Come on, someone can do better. No mention of the hairstyle to start with.

 

[Darat]

Maybe. But we still don't know what the McMichaels already knew about Arbery. If they were at all aware of his penchant for threatening and aggressive behaviour, even with cops, they might have figured that they needed to be armed to intimidate him into acquiescence. And they'd have been right, but even that wasn't enough to stop the dumb bastard attacking them.

From the bodycam footage we've seen he was manifestly an unbalanced thug who'd be triggered in an instant into losing what little capacity he had for self-restraint - what would go through your mind running into someone dressed like him and with his demeanour (particularly in a secluded area), the low pants and boxers/basketball pants sticking out, bare-chested under a parka on a warm spring/summer's day?

According to McMichael their victim made at least one attempt to escape them and avoid a confrontation. They forced a confrontation.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Maybe. But we still don't know what the McMichaels already knew about Arbery. If they were at all aware of his penchant for threatening and aggressive behaviour, even with cops, they might have figured that they needed to be armed to intimidate him into acquiescence. And they'd have been right, but even that wasn't enough to stop the dumb bastard attacking them.

This is interesting.

A previous defence of the McMichaels has relied on them not knowing who he was. Because if they knew who he was then they didn't need to do anything other than call the police and tell them who he was.

Now the defence is that they did know who he was.

Even then, it's a stupid defence, because it doesn't actually exonerate them. It doesn't make what they did any less of a felony, and it doesn't make his death any less of a murder. It just is an excuse for why they might have thought that the stupid felony they committed was a slightly less stupid felony.

From the bodycam footage we've seen he was manifestly an unbalanced thug who'd be triggered in an instant into losing what little capacity he had for self-restraint - what would go through your mind running into someone dressed like him and with his demeanour (particularly in a secluded area), the low pants and boxers/basketball pants sticking out, bare-chested under a parka on a warm spring/summer's day?

I see we're back to being afraid of black people.

At least the racists are openly admitting that it's all based on fear and paranoia.

 

[Dave Rogers]

If you had to guess, what do you think Roddie will reveal when he spills the beans on the hillbillies?

I think I agree with you on this one. There's plenty of evidence to convict all three of felony murder without making a deal for anyone.

Dave

 

[Darat]

This is interesting.

A previous defence of the McMichaels has relied on them not knowing who he was. Because if they knew who he was then they didn't need to do anything other than call the police and tell them who he was.

Now the defence is that they did know who he was.

Even then, it's a stupid defence, because it doesn't actually exonerate them. It doesn't make what they did any less of a felony, and it doesn't make his death any less of a murder. It just is an excuse for why they might have thought that the stupid felony they committed was a slightly less stupid felony.

...snip...

For them to have any kind of defence they need to say their initial statements to the police were all wrong, I can almost hear the prosecutor thinking "go on - you are doing my job for me".

 

[TurkeysGhost]

The video was released May 5. That's when GBI bot involved. New DA assigned on May 12. The previous DA accepted the offer of help from GBI and asked that the case be assigned to a new DA. So GBI was probably waiting until the new DA got assigned and up to speed before taking any action.

But maybe they got a phone or computer that showed communications between McMichaels and Roddie. But reports were that nobody saw GBI taking anything away.

So maybe they have new evidence. Or maybe it is just getting things in order proceeding with the new crew.

Thanks for this. Your point is well taken, the current crop of investigators hasn't really been on the case that long.

Arresting the McMichaels was probably a much easier conclusion to reach. Maybe it just took a bit more time to make a decision about Roddie. From the perspective of the current DA, not that much time has passed, so reading into timing like I was is probably unwise.

If all this had happened back in February, it really wouldn't have been that unusual. Things are only strange now because of the corrupt games the previous DA's were playing.

 

[JoeMorgue]

This is not a good sign for the McMichaels.

I see this as an indicator that they view things the same way that most in this thread do - the McMichaels and Bryan were committing a felony, during the course of which someone was killed and under law that means it was felony murder.

I'm still a bit more pessimistic. Again my mind can't get past the fact of how long after the fact all of this is happening.

Again I can't fully grasp how the "I don't see how they can get away with it!" mentality works when they already well and good had.

As I stated before my fear is now they are going to pile on the charges specifically to set it up so them getting a slap on the wrist is seen as some "reasonable compromise."

 

[whoanellie]

This is the longest collections of euphemisms for the word “black” I’ve ever seen. Congratulations.

Come on, someone can do better. No mention of the hairstyle to start with.

Those aren't 'euphemisms' more like racist dog whistles.

 

[whoanellie]

This is interesting.

A previous defence of the McMichaels has relied on them not knowing who he was. Because if they knew who he was then they didn't need to do anything other than call the police and tell them who he was.

Now the defence is that they did know who he was.

Even then, it's a stupid defence, because it doesn't actually exonerate them. It doesn't make what they did any less of a felony, and it doesn't make his death any less of a murder. It just is an excuse for why they might have thought that the stupid felony they committed was a slightly less stupid felony.

If they knew who Arbery was it is actually much worse for the McMichaels. As you say, if they knew who he was they didn't need to chase after him at all, much less with guns. They just needed to identify him to the responding police officers.

 

[lionking]

If they knew who Arbery was it is actually much worse for the McMichaels. As you say, if they knew who he was they didn't need to chase after him at all, much less with guns. They just needed to identify him to the responding police officers.

Awww, there's no fun in that.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Is there any credible evidence anywhere that the McMichaels knew who Arbery was?

I only see accusations by the racists trying to paint Arbery as a menace widely known by local law enforcement. This strikes me as purely speculative and wishful thinking by those motivated to paint a black victim as the aggressor.

 

[pgwenthold]

That's going to be a huge logical hurdle for the defense to leap if they try to claim they thought they were in pursuit of a thief. Did they think he stole a pocket's worth of nails? An uninstalled doorknob?

A bigger hurdle about their claim that they thought they were pursuing a thief is the fact that he hadn't stolen anything. So they weren't.

The Georgia Citizen's Arrest laws require immediate knowledge of a crime. "We thought he did something wrong" is not "immediate knowledge."

Heck, even if he had taken a doorknob, they had no knowledge of that when they chased him.

 

[Darat]

Is there any credible evidence anywhere that the McMichaels knew who Arbery was?

I only see accusations by the racists trying to paint Arbery as a menace widely known by local law enforcement. This strikes me as purely speculative and wishful thinking by those motivated to paint a black victim as the aggressor.

From the initial report "...Michae1 stated the unidentified male began to ..."

If it does turn out they already knew him that would make it even worse for them!

 

[pgwenthold]

Is there any credible evidence anywhere that the McMichaels knew who Arbery was?

I only see accusations by the racists trying to paint Arbery as a menace widely known by local law enforcement. This strikes me as purely speculative and wishful thinking by those motivated to paint a black victim as the aggressor.

It's hard to keep up with all the claims that have been made, and whether they are credible. I do remember seeing a claim that the father had been involved with one of the shoplifting cases, and therefore was familiar with the victim. Then again, credible or not, I have no idea but that claim is out there.

 

[Thermal]

From the initial report "...Michae1 stated the unidentified male began to ..."

If it does turn out they already knew him that would make it even worse for them!

As I understand it, they recognized him but didn't know his name, rank, and serial number. More like 'theres that guy again' than 'check it out, it's Ahmaud'

 

[Thermal]

Maybe. But we still don't know what the McMichaels already knew about Arbery. If they were at all aware of his penchant for threatening and aggressive behaviour, even with cops, they might have figured that they needed to be armed to intimidate him into acquiescence. And they'd have been right, but even that wasn't enough to stop the dumb bastard attacking them.

From the bodycam footage we've seen he was manifestly an unbalanced thug who'd be triggered in an instant into losing what little capacity he had for self-restraint - what would go through your mind running into someone dressed like him and with his demeanour (particularly in a secluded area), the low pants and boxers/basketball pants sticking out, bare-chested under a parka on a warm spring/summer's day?

This is a felony. They'll be going down hard if they run with that as a defense.

 

[Darat]

Is there any credible evidence anywhere that the McMichaels knew who Arbery was?

I only see accusations by the racists trying to paint Arbery as a menace widely known by local law enforcement. This strikes me as purely speculative and wishful thinking by those motivated to paint a black victim as the aggressor.

From the initial report "...Michae1 stated the unidentified male began to ..."

If it does turn out they already knew him that would make it even worse for them!

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I'm still a bit more pessimistic. Again my mind can't get past the fact of how long after the fact all of this is happening.

Again I can't fully grasp how the "I don't see how they can get away with it!" mentality works when they already well and good had.

Your second paragraph here is the reason for your first.

There's national attention, and the GBI is involved. The charges are felonies.

I expect the authorities (who are different authorities who let them get away with it - partially because they knew them personally) are going to do their jobs.

This doesn't mean that I think they will be convicted. Whether or not the jurors think it's okay to murder a black man will be very important.

But it seems like the authorities are doing their jobs properly and, from my layman's position, it looks like the case is pretty clear-cut against the McMichaels - unless you're starting from the position that it is okay to murder black men, or from the position that you move in the same circles as the McMichaels and therefore have to protect them. I think it's unlikely that the latter applies to the current authorities, and I think that the public attention will work to mitigate the former, if it needs mitigation.