Cont: Jogging in Georgia while black - The Trial

[TurkeysGhost]

Why do you delight in the idea of this family being destroyed in that way?

I can't speak for ST, but it's the accent for me.

I'm just trying to score some cheap lakefront property.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

I can't speak for ST, but it's the accent for me.

I actually have to actively work to fight the conditioning about southerners.

All the media I grew up with has led to a situation where I still have a lot of these prejudices about the "good ole boys" and that accent still makes me immediately think "I'm listening to someone who is stupid."

All of the stuff infused by countless cartoons, TV shows, movies, books.

Inbred hillbilly, boinking the cousin, living in the trailer park, moonshine, "Bubba", and on and on it goes.

I've come to realize that southerners have a beautiful culture and history and are generally great people. The relentless campaign of hatred against them is disgusting.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Ah yes the proud southern culture of killing blacks who come into your neighborhood, why are so many taking issue with this cultural heritage?

 

[plague311]

I actually have to actively work to fight the conditioning about southerners.

Must be absolutely exhausting for you.

All the media I grew up with has led to a situation where I still have a lot of these prejudices about the "good ole boys" and that accent still makes me immediately think "I'm listening to someone who is stupid."

Along with your well-known racism it sounds pretty easy to get you to judge people based on trivial things like skin color and vernacular.

I was joking with my comment.

All of the stuff infused by countless cartoons, TV shows, movies, books.

Inbred hillbilly, boinking the cousin, living in the trailer park, moonshine, "Bubba", and on and on it goes.

....ok

I've come to realize that southerners have a beautiful culture and history and are generally great people. The relentless campaign of hatred against them is disgusting.

Well, I have some amazing news for you. I have no hatred against Southerners, in general. You'll be happy to know I only get irritated by the Southerners that chase down PoC and kill them for no good reason.

I also think they have a beautiful culture in that it's American culture. You seem to segregate people a lot. Might be something to look into.

Good talk.

 

[lobosrul5]

I can't understand how anyone could get themselves into a mentality where the idea of a young father looking out for his neighborhood, who was attacked for his trouble, NOT going to prison for the rest of his life is somehow some kind of "dark scenario I'm really worried might happen!"

Like, this is a guy who was trying to protect his community and trying to stop a criminal so police could question him. This is a man who served his country for nearly a decade. A father, a veteran, and someone who is civic minded enough and brave enough to go confront a criminal to try to make his community safer for everyone in it.

And it's some kind of dark "says a lot about our country and how backwards it is!" type of thing for him to NOT go rot in prison for doing that? How do you people get into this worldview? It's twisted.

I believe that the racial dynamics have a lot of explanatory power here. I think if it had been a white burglar they went and confronted and ended up having to shoot in self-defense, this wouldn't even be a story and (video or not) they would've never been charged. I suspect a lot of people who currently are treating the idea of a not guilty verdict as something akin to "welp, guess the KKK runs the country!" would treat a not guilty verdict if Arbery was white as nothing more than a momentary "gosh, America has some weird self defense laws and derp derp, guns are bad and America sure loves guns!" or more likely yet, they wouldn't even hear about the case to comment on it at all.

These three men should not be punished because the criminal they confronted happened to be black. They didn't get to choose what color the criminal was. It's especially perverse to make a criminal being black some sort of trigger for far harsher punishment and attention on a case, when a criminal being black is like a rapist being male.

I'm not sure I've ever seen a more clear example of victim blaming in my life. I've let it lapse but I guess its time to get my CCW license back if its the case that armed people can chase down an unarmed person that they think maybe might have been involved in a minor crime against a third party, then shoot them dead when they have the utter audacity to not accept whatever punishment they decide. If thats now accepted precedent then we all just need to go around armed and whoever shoots first is in the right. (hint hint Arbery would've been 100% morally fine to shoot at least 2 of the accused dead, the 3rd I'm not sure).


And also stop it with the ******* veteran status thing. We don't live in a Heinlein novel. I thank veterans for their service, that confers zero special law enforcement privileges to them. Nor does someone who is a father... of a ******* grown ass man... he wasn't protecting his 12 year old daughter from a rapist or something.

 

[stanfr]

I can't speak for ST, but it's the accent for me.

Good point--if they had British accents I think i'd be inclined to let them walk.

 

[Bob001]

.....
Like, this is a guy who was trying to protect his community and trying to stop a criminal so police could question him.
.....

1/ Arbery was not a criminal, he didn't steal anything, he was not armed, and there is no evidence that he posed any threat to the community.

2/ The McMichaels had no legal or moral authority to confront him, let alone chase him and kill him. They functioned as modern-day slave catchers.

It's astonishing to me that anyone could think these guys should walk.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

1/ Arbery was not a criminal, he didn't steal anything, he was not armed, and there is no evidence that he posed any threat to the community.

2/ The McMichaels had no legal or moral authority to confront him, let alone chase him and kill him. They functioned as modern-day slave catchers.
It's astonishing to me that anyone could think these guys should walk.

They confronted a white homeless dude under a bridge they thought might've been stealing stuff.

Were they functioning as "modern-day slave catchers" during that incident as well?

Would they have been modern-day slave catchers if Arbery had been a Chinese dude skulking around Larry English's house under construction and they'd confronted him? Or a white dude?

In what sense were they like modern-day slave catchers? Just simply because they were white men in the south and Arbery was black, and they were pursuing and confronting him?

If you simply are made very squeamish by the optics of black criminals being confronted, I'm sorry but I guess take it up with the black community who are choosing to be outrageously criminal.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

They confronted a white homeless dude under a bridge they thought might've been stealing stuff.

.

Not sure pointing out that these morons were extremely paranoid of others in the area and made a habit out of confronting strangers is very helpful to their image problem.

I suppose they were successful in their quest to make their neighborhood safer. With them gone for the rest of their natural lives, the risk going forward will be much lower. People will be able to go outside without having to worry about explaining themselves to armed busybodies.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Not sure pointing out that these morons were extremely paranoid of others in the area and made a habit out of confronting strangers is very helpful to their image problem.

I suppose they were successful in their quest to make their neighborhood safer. With them gone for the rest of their natural lives, the risk going forward will be much lower. People will be able to go outside without having to worry about explaining themselves to armed busybodies.

Hasn't the trial demonstrated that there were a number of neighbors who were concerned about the thefts and people like Arbery prowling around?

 

[rockinkt]

*Sighs* I'm just saying your (and to be clear very good and very knowledgably, I'm not taking that away from you) ongoing critique on how well the prosecution is doing and how poorly the defense is doing on the "Grading according to the textbook" way does not translate to my faith in the results to the degree you think it should.

You've made a very good case for why the prosecution should win. That's not exactly the same thing as a solid case for why it will. The system is broken, that's the whole point. And in broken systems the system always looks like its going to work... right up until it doesn't. If a good lawyer was all it took black people would have a lot more justice then they do.

I sincerely hope you're right and I'm wrong. I'm not saying this in some sort of "Neener neener I know more then you wanna bet" way. I'm saying we live in a world where the wrong that happens a lot when the good side can basically go "Well but according to the chart I should have won..."

Short translation: Don't confuse me with the facts - my mind is made up.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Hasn't the trial demonstrated that there were a number of neighbors who were concerned about the thefts and people like Arbery prowling around?

A lot of them made the wise decision to not commit murder. They will continue to enjoy living among free people and can worry about boogiemen to their heart's content. The McMichaels and Roddie will be warehoused away from the public until they eventually die.

 

[plague311]

They confronted a white homeless dude under a bridge they thought might've been stealing stuff.

Were they functioning as "modern-day slave catchers" during that incident as well?

Why did they confront anyone? What possible point was there when neither of them are police, investigators or have law enforcement privileges. This would also imply they knew what color the man was before going to confront him.

Would they have been modern-day slave catchers if Arbery had been a Chinese dude skulking around Larry English's house under construction and they'd confronted him? Or a white dude?

Makes no difference. Arbery wasn't Chinese or white. Take your fan fic elsewhere.

If you simply are made very squeamish by the optics of black criminals being confronted, I'm sorry but I guess take it up with the black community who are choosing to be outrageously criminal.

As was mentioned to you before, the McMichael's knew of no crime, and Arbery had never been shown to have stolen anything, ever.

 

[Bob001]

.....
In what sense were they like modern-day slave catchers? Just simply because they were white men in the south and Arbery was black, and they were pursuing and confronting him?
.....

Yes, actually. They had no basis to pursue and confront Arbery. If they thought something was wrong, the extent and limit of their responsibility was to call the cops. Arbery had absolutely no obligation to cooperate with them, especially at gunpoint.

And the citizen's arrest statute that they falsely claimed protected them was directly descended from the slave-catcher laws.

Whether you believe the defendants in this case are racist or not, it is undisputed that they felt empowered to act under Georgia’s citizen’s arrest statute, enacted in 1863. That law—which was rightly repealed by Georgia’s Republican governor in the wake of Arbery’s death—permitted civilians to detain anyone if they had “immediate knowledge” that the person committed a crime or “reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion” to believe he was a fleeing felon.

It is this law that stands between the defendants and guilty verdicts for conduct that would otherwise be indefensible vigilante violence. While race-neutral on its face, it is rooted in racism. As the Cornell historian Ed Baptist explained to me, “these laws going all the way back to the 1600s demonstrate a very long pattern of whites, particularly in the South, believing that they have the discretion to use deadly force against African Americans in situations that are outside their homes when they are not authorized in any professional way to do this.”

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/progressives-have-been-obsessing

 

[plague311]

Hasn't the trial demonstrated that there were a number of neighbors who were concerned about the thefts and people like Arbery prowling around?

Arbery? No. In fact, most of the incidents where the police were called were proven, by transcripts and police reports, to have been committed by white males. They still don't know who the thefts were committed by since Arbery hadn't been shown to commit them at all.

 

[smartcooky]

I can't understand how anyone could get themselves into a mentality where the idea of a young father looking out for his neighborhood, who was attacked for his trouble, NOT going to prison for the rest of his life is somehow some kind of "dark scenario I'm really worried might happen!"

He was not "looking out for his neighborhood" he was out to kill a black person for no other reason than he was black. Arbury didn't attack McMichaels, the three of them Cletus, Bubba and Billybob spent five whole minutes attacking him with pickup trucks and threatening him with guns. THE WHOLE CHASE WAS AN ATTACK ON ARBURY. If you have bothered to watch the video, you will see that Arbury fought back only when he was trapped. The gun didn't just "go off" while the two struggled for control of it, McMichaels fired it THREE TIMES, he shot Arbury THREE TIMES. Only a racist sees it in the twisted way you do.

I believe that the racial dynamics have a lot of explanatory power here. I think if it had been a white burglar they went and confronted and ended up having to shoot in self-defense, this wouldn't even be a story and (video or not) they would've never been charged. I suspect a lot of people who currently are treating the idea of a not guilty verdict as something akin to "welp, guess the KKK runs the country!" would treat a not guilty verdict if Arbery was white as nothing more than a momentary "gosh, America has some weird self defense laws and derp derp, guns are bad and America sure loves guns!" or more likely yet, they wouldn't even hear about the case to comment on it at all.

These three men should not be punished because the criminal they confronted happened to be black. They didn't get to choose what color the criminal was. It's especially perverse to make a criminal being black some sort of trigger for far harsher punishment and attention on a case, when a criminal being black is like a rapist being male

1. Yep, racial dynamics do have a lot of explanatory power here, but not in the way you imagine. If Arbury was a white guy dressed in basketball shorts, running shoes and a T shirt and running along the roads in the neighbourhood, NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. They would not have chased him... they only noticed Arbury because he was black. Only a racist doesn't understand this.

2. Please show your evidence that Arbury committed criminal acts or a burglary, on the day he was murdered, AND that Cletus, Bubba and Billiybob had ex probiis sensibus; that they had first hand, personally observed knowledge of this alleged felony as it was in progress, i.e. in order to pursue Arbury for the purposes of effectiing a citizen's arrest, at least one of them needed to personally see him commit the felony as he was committing it. On the morning of the murder, they didn't see Arbury in Larry English's house; they didn't even know he had just been in there, all the saw was a black man run past their house, and they assumed he was fleeing; an assumption they were not legally entitled to make and act upon.

And it's some kind of dark "says a lot about our country and how backwards it is!" type of thing for him to NOT go rot in prison for doing that? How do you people get into this worldview? It's twisted.

This from someone whose worldview includes summary execution of blacks for being black. Do you understand the meaning of the word "hypocrisy"

Why do you delight in the idea of this family being destroyed in that way?

Why do you delight in the idea of Arbury's family being destroyed?
Don't bother answering. I know the answer, it because they a black, and you consider blacks to be untermenschen.

 

[I Am The Scum]

The racist cannot have a little murder, not even as a treat.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

The racist cannot have a little murder, not even as a treat.

well, they can, but they can't show off the snuff film to their neighbors to convince them that they are the good guys.

 

[plague311]

well, they can, but they can't show off the snuff film to their neighbors to convince them that they are the good guys.

Sshh, you're not supposed to tell them that. They won't share it and get caught next time (though I hope there is never a next time).

 

[Skeptic Tank]

He was not "looking out for his neighborhood" he was out to kill a black person for no other reason than he was black.

Pro-tip: this kind of goofy statement is the sort of thing that has even others who mostly agree with your view of things starting to think I sound like the reasonable one.

But you do you.