Cont: Jogging in Georgia while black - The Trial

[JoeMorgue]

It's Georgia, why would it matter if Arbery was armed? Carrying a gun on a public street is 100% legal, where illegally trying to detain people and murdering them when they don't comply is not.

Same reason Arbery doesn't have the right of self defense against the angry white mob but angry white mob has the right of self defense against him.

 

[plague311]

Judge had to call another recess so he could read through some transcripts. The prosecution took a jab at the defense by saying something along the lines of "we've had 3 months to get this figured out and we couldn't until now?" Not verbatim, but that's the general theme.

I knew that this was going to be more time consuming with 3 defendants but this is getting really crazy. I think I've seen more court room time without the jury in the room than with because of all of the objections.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Same reason Arbery doesn't have the right of self defense against the angry white mob but angry white mob has the right of self defense against him.

It's patent BS anyway. Nothing about their actions indicate they were fearful of Arbery. If they thought he had a gun they would not have been so keen on staying right on top of him where they might get shot.

The slow chase, vehicle strikes, and checkpoint in the road makes it quite clear that they did not think they faced much risk of meaningful retaliation to their aggression.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Well that's why a lot of us are so angry.

The facts are not, and never really have been, in dispute. They are guilty in their own version of events. Nothing they say about their mentality matches their actions. There's nothing to talk about. They are guilty.

In any sane world this would be a 10 minute open and shut case rubber stamped by any any random prosecutor.

But no we have to sit here while they go through there "Okay but what if I thought in my head some alternative universe series of events was happening?" checklist over and over. And just like Office "Shot First And Notice Which Apartment You Are in Later" they have to be billybadass and scawwed widdle victims at the same time in the same set of events, constantly escalated a situation they claim they were in fear of their lives during.

All after the original DA didn't even want to try them.

If Arbery HAD wrestled one of the guns away and shot one of the other 3 in self defense, he'd be in jail.

 

[plague311]

If it makes any difference at all Travis McMichael was visibly shaken up, per the defense. I know, Arbery is dead, but Travis was shaken up. So...you know.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

I quite simply refuse to believe that anyone in this thread, and anyone on the prosecution team, regardless of what they may say - ACTUALLY thinks there was any sort of desire on the part of the McMichaels to end up shooting Arbery, or that they were doing any sort of "black man hunt."

I guess those sorts of things are fun to say, and get yourself worked up into some righteous SJW frenzy or whatever, but I don't think there's any way anyone actually believes it.

Likewise, nobody actually believes Ahmaud was just out jogging, innocently wandered into the construction site, bolted as a way of resuming his jog, and refused to stop, interact with, or speak with the McMichaels because he either felt "they've got no right to interrupt my jog, or expect me to talk to them" or due to thinking they were racist KKKlanzmen on the hunt, intending to kill him.

Literally everyone with any sort of functioning brain, from prosecutor to forum poster, is fully aware that he was a habitual criminal who ran and refused to interact because of being that, and having the mindset of that.

When people talk about it in any way that doesn't openly and directly acknowledge that, it always has the flavor of "well sure, maybe he was... but the McMichaels didn't know that for sure! And how dare they be so racist, assume so much, and dare to act on their assumptions? The fact that their appraisal of Arbery was 100% accurate just makes it worse, if anything!"

Your beef isn't with the McMichaels. Your beef is with reality and the frustrating tendency it has to confirm / conform to stereotypes.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I quite simply refuse to believe that anyone in this thread, and anyone on the prosecution team, regardless of what they may say - ACTUALLY thinks there was any sort of desire on the part of the McMichaels to end up shooting Arbery, or that they were doing any sort of "black man hunt."

I guess those sorts of things are fun to say, and get yourself worked up into some righteous SJW frenzy or whatever, but I don't think there's any way anyone actually believes it.

Likewise, nobody actually believes Ahmaud was just out jogging, innocently wandered into the construction site, bolted as a way of resuming his jog, and refused to stop, interact with, or speak with the McMichaels because he either felt "they've got no right to interrupt my jog, or expect me to talk to them" or due to thinking they were racist KKKlanzmen on the hunt, intending to kill him.

Literally everyone with any sort of functioning brain, from prosecutor to forum poster, is fully aware that he was a habitual criminal who ran and refused to interact because of being that, and having the mindset of that.

When people talk about it in any way that doesn't openly and directly acknowledge that, it always has the flavor of "well sure, maybe he was... but the McMichaels didn't know that for sure! And how dare they be so racist, assume so much, and dare to act on their assumptions? The fact that their appraisal of Arbery was 100% accurate just makes it worse, if anything!"

Your beef isn't with the McMichaels. Your beef is with reality and the frustrating tendency it has to confirm / conform to stereotypes.

Pathetic.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Same reason Arbery doesn't have the right of self defense against the angry white mob but angry white mob has the right of self defense against him.

A couple of men who live in a neighborhood you don't live in, that you are visiting (whether for a "jog" or not - and in this case, it was NOT) - and in which you have made repeated dead-of-night visits to a house under construction in, approaching you and asking you what you're doing there - is not something from which you "defend yourself."

A man charging you and punching you, trying to take your firearm away, IS something which you defend yourself from.

Much like a man keeping an eye on you from a distance in a neighborhood you are visiting, while talking to police on his cell phone, or even approaching and confronting you (which didn't happen) is not something from which you "defend yourself" - but a man straddling you and bashing your head into pavement is.

 

[JoeMorgue]

A couple of men who live in a neighborhood you don't live in, that you are visiting (whether for a "jog" or not - and in this case, it was NOT) - and in which you have made repeated dead-of-night visits to a house under construction in, approaching you and asking you what you're doing there - is not something from which you "defend yourself."

A man charging you and punching you, trying to take your firearm away, IS something which you defend yourself from.

Much like a man keeping an eye on you from a distance in a neighborhood you are visiting, while talking to police on his cell phone, or even approaching and confronting you (which didn't happen) is not something from which you "defend yourself" - but a man straddling you and bashing your head into pavement is.

Pathetic.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Pathetic.

Agreed.

I will have to continue to aspire to your high level of well thought out, detailed response.

Stellar. Humbling to behold.

 

[plague311]

I quite simply refuse to believe that anyone in this thread, and anyone on the prosecution team, regardless of what they may say - ACTUALLY thinks there was any sort of desire on the part of the McMichaels to end up shooting Arbery, or that they were doing any sort of "black man hunt."

So simply refuse it. I don't think anyone really cares. That's part of the problem with waiving your racism flag every opportunity you get. Those who have interacted with you just don't take your arguments with any credibility when it comes to racial tensions.

I guess those sorts of things are fun to say, and get yourself worked up into some righteous SJW frenzy or whatever, but I don't think there's any way anyone actually believes it.

Loudly spouting racism might be fun to say, and get oneself worked up into some righteous "White people are better than PoC" frenzy, or whatever, but I don't think there's any way anyone actually believes it.

Likewise, nobody actually believes Ahmaud was just out jogging, innocently wandered into the construction site,

You mean like dozens of other people who had been shown on camera doing the same thing over the weeks the camera was setup in the house? Yeah, how could anyone believe that?

bolted as a way of resuming his jog,

Huh?

and refused to stop, interact with, or speak with the McMichaels because he either felt "they've got no right to interrupt my jog, or expect me to talk to them" or due to thinking they were racist KKKlanzmen on the hunt, intending to kill him.

How about if I were to retort with, "He had absolutely no ******* responsibility or requirement to talk to them at all, for any reason"? How would that suit you? No one owed the McRacist's any explanation of anything. It wasn't their house, it wasn't their property, and they weren't an authority. That's the actual point.

Literally everyone with any sort of functioning brain,

from prosecutor to forum poster, is fully aware that he was a habitual criminal who ran and refused to interact because of being that, and having the mindset of that.

But nah, though. Anyone with a functional brain can see that a group of racist dummies got themselves in trouble for hunting down a black man for no reason at all. If you'd watched the trial, you'd know that the honkies had absolutely no idea where Arbery had been, where he was coming from, going to, or anything.

When people talk about it in any way that doesn't openly and directly acknowledge that, it always has the flavor of "well sure, maybe he was... but the McMichaels didn't know that for sure at all! And how dare they be so racist, assume so much, and dare to act on their assumptions? The fact that their appraisal of Arbery was 100% accurate just makes it worse, if anything!"

FTFY. Being a criminal in his past has nothing to do with the day of his death. That's one of the points of the trial. Any crime he'd done he had already served (was serving? I'm not sure if he was on any form of probation or parole) any punishment he'd received for said crimes.

Your beef isn't with the McMichaels. Your beef is with reality and the frustrating tendency it has to confirm / conform to stereotypes.

Well, you're partially right. There is a stereotype that has been conformed to here. Some good ol' country white boys decided they was going to hassle themselves a black person, they did, they ended up killing him. Just like we've seen and heard of for years. The only difference, and the part that sucks for racists like you and the McMichaels, is that now it's getting caught on camera. The real kicker here is that they're the ones that kicked their own ass by recording it lol.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Agreed.

I will have to continue to aspire to your high level of well thought out, detailed response.

Stellar. Humbling to behold.

Your boos mean nothing. I've seen what makes you cheer.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

A couple of men who live in a neighborhood you don't live in, that you are visiting (whether for a "jog" or not - and in this case, it was NOT) - and in which you have made repeated dead-of-night visits to a house under construction in, approaching you and asking you what you're doing there - is not something from which you "defend yourself."

A man charging you and punching you, trying to take your firearm away, IS something which you defend yourself from.

Much like a man keeping an eye on you from a distance in a neighborhood you are visiting, while talking to police on his cell phone, or even approaching and confronting you (which didn't happen) is not something from which you "defend yourself" - but a man straddling you and bashing your head into pavement is.

I suppose the evidence showing that they struck Arbery with a truck prior to the fatal confrontation doesn't really fit too neatly into this concerned citizen narrative.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

How about if I were to retort with, "He had absolutely no ******* responsibility or requirement to talk to them at all, for any reason"? How would that suit you? No one owed the McRacist's any explanation of anything. It wasn't their house, it wasn't their property, and they weren't an authority. That's the actual point.

K, stipulated.

He had no legal requirement to interact with them or answer their questions, or stop for them.

(Now, I don't know that this is actually true given the citizen's arrest laws as they existed at that time, but I'm prepared to agree to it being true regardless - for the sake of discussion.)

Alright, so now with that established... that he wasn't REQUIRED to do it, what do you actually believe to be the reason that he didn't?

Because you and I both know that an innocent person would, in basically 100% of cases, stop and at least have some sort of discussion. Tell them to F off, tell them in some sort of way that they've misunderstood the situation, or misidentified him, etc. Many, many people would even go so far as to say "sure, by all means, can't wait til the cops get here. You're going to be feeling pretty stupid when they do."

Hell, even most guilty parties would do some of that.

So who just keeps running, makes no response, dodges around cars, and eventually lunges, punches, and grabs for a gun?

There's really only one explanation I can think of for that behavior. I'd be curious if you have another one in mind.

 

[smartcooky]

Some good ol' country white boys decided they was going to hassle themselves a black person have themselves a lynchin' ..... The only difference is, , and the part that sucks for racists like you and the McMichaels, is that now it's getting caught on camera. The real kicker here is that they're the ones that kicked their own ass by recording it lol they used pickup trucks and guns instead of horses and rope.

FTFY

 

[JoeMorgue]

K, stipulated.

He had no legal requirement to interact with them or answer their questions, or stop for them.

(Now, I don't know that this is actually true given the citizen's arrest laws as they existed at that time, but I'm prepared to agree to it being true regardless - for the sake of discussion.)

Alright, so now with that established... that he wasn't REQUIRED to do it, what do you actually believe to be the reason that he didn't?

Because you and I both know that an innocent person would, in basically 100% of cases, stop and at least have some sort of discussion. Tell them to F off, tell them in some sort of way that they've misunderstood the situation, or misidentified him, etc. Many, many people would even go so far as to say "sure, by all means, can't wait til the cops get here. You're going to be feeling pretty stupid when they do."

Hell, even most guilty parties would do some of that.

So who just keeps running, makes no response, dodges around cars, and eventually lunges, punches, and grabs for a gun?

There's really only one explanation I can think of for that behavior. I'd be curious if you have another one in mind.

"He acted guilty so he needed killing" isn't in the legal system. Try again.

 

[Suddenly]

It's Georgia, why would it matter if Arbery was armed? Carrying a gun on a public street is 100% legal, where illegally trying to detain people and murdering them when they don't comply is not.

Maybe they should have claimed it was suspicious because he wasn't armed. Obviously that meant he had some sort of fatal surprised planned so they had no choice but to kill...

 

[Suddenly]

"He acted guilty so he needed killing" isn't in the legal system. Try again.

I mean, not officially, but I think this is the motto of several police unions.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

"He acted guilty so he needed killing" isn't in the legal system. Try again.

I'm not saying "he acted guilty, so he needed killing."

I'm saying that his behavior, as well as his criminal record, blasts a massive hole in all the narratives that have fueled the outrage about this since the story first broke. All those narratives have centered around him being an innocent jogger, mistakenly perceived as a criminal / burglar based on nothing but his skin color, and shot down in the street for no reason.

That's all (as usual, with all such cases) 100% nonsense.

 

[plague311]

K, stipulated.

He had no legal requirement to interact with them or answer their questions, or stop for them.

I know, that's what I said.

(Now, I don't know that this is actually true given the citizen's arrest laws as they existed at that time, but I'm prepared to agree to it being true regardless - for the sake of discussion.)

Even as they were at the time, Arbery had absolutely no responsibility to speak with them at all. Watch the trial. The defense isn't even arguing it. The honkies were not police doing an active investigation. Again, I don't know why you won't acknowledge this, they had no idea that Arbery had entered the property. To the best of their knowledge at the time Arbery hadn't even trespassed.

Alright, so now with that established... that he wasn't REQUIRED to do it, what do you actually believe to be the reason that he didn't?

I don't give a ****, to be perfectly honest. I'm talking about a court case where people are on trial for a crime. I'm not going to help write your fanfic for you.

Because you and I both know that an innocent person would, in basically 100% of cases, stop and at least have some sort of discussion.

Haha I sure as hell wouldn't for a myriad of reasons. Guilty or not. First and foremost because I don't have any need to tell them anything. Also, if they were cops, the first rule of talking to cops is NOT TO TALK TO THE COPS.

Tell them to F off,

Why escalate a situation needlessly? That would be dumb.

tell them in some sort of way that they've misunderstood the situation,

It's none of their business. As mentioned, what situation could they have misunderstood? They had no idea where Arbery had come from or where was he going? What should he say they misunderstood? That he was actually white?

or misidentified him, etc.

Arbery should tell the men that they've misidentified him? When they're saying they're going to blow his head off? Who would he say they SHOULD be looking for?

Many, many people would even go so far as to say "sure, by all means, can't wait til the cops get here. You're going to be feeling pretty stupid when they do."

Yeah, that works out well for black people all the time. Or he could have, you know, gone about his business without bothering anyone like he had been doing the whole time? The McMichael's didn't even call the ******* cops until late in the game. If the McMichael's were telling the truth, why didn't they call the cops to begin with? Take a wild guess.

Hell, even most guilty parties would do some of that.

As a convicted felon, I'm calling complete ********. I will never talk to anyone again under any circumstances until my lawyer is present.

So who just keeps running, makes no response, dodges around cars, and eventually lunges, punches, and grabs for a gun?

Someone who is being chased, has nothing to say, is being hit with said cars, doesn't want to get shot, is defending himself, and doesn't want to get shot. Respectfully.

There's really only one explanation I can think of for that behavior. I'd be curious if you have another one in mind.

All of the things I said. You're a racist, that's why you have only one explanation because anything beyond his skin color means nothing to you. You'll make any loose connections you possibly can as long as it makes him look guilty.