Roddy admitted to trying to and actually running Arbery off the road. That's going to be assault and false imprisonment and probably felony murder unless he can establish a citizen's arrest angle. Roddy will probably follow that defense I posted above. He saw a guy matching a known suspicious character being chased by his neighbors, including a former police officer. He believed they had caught him committing a crime, so he joined the chase. It is a bit sketchy to base a probable suspicion on just a neighbor saying that they are chasing a bad guy, but jurors may consider the weight of the charges in what would otherwise probably be a rather minor offense if Travis hadn't pulled the trigger. If they find him guilty on the minor charges, then it is difficult to not also find him guilty felony murder. Some may feel that is too much. Some jurors may also feel that Roddy was doing what he thought was the right thing to protect the community. He might get off.
Greg's big problem is the "blow your head off" comment. He could distance himself from Travis. Greg wasn't driving the truck. Without that statement, he could say his intent was simply to follow Arbery and ask him to stop so they could talk to him. Nothing illegal about that. What Travis did with the truck and the gun were his own decisions. But that comment turns it into assault (although perhaps not at a felony level) but also very likely false imprisonment.

Travis is doomed. He had no legal reason to do any of this. Although not technically legally relevant, the jurors are going to think about what he could have done different. Did he have to pull the trigger? Did he have to get out of the truck with the shotgun? They had eventually called the cops. Arbery was on foot and they had two trucks that could follow him around. The jurors are not going to like that. He may well get off on malice murder (I not sure there is a strong case for that) but I don't see him getting out of felony murder.

What I find extraordinary is that Bryant didn't just make a deal to throw the McMichaelses under the bus. He could have come at it from the angle that he knew his neighbour was an ex-cop, therefore thought it was reasonable for him to assume what they were doing was legal, if Greg McMichaels said so.

Also, I can't see how the defence that they were trying make a citizen's arrest can possibly succeed or even be allowed as an affirmative defence.

Georgia Code § 17-4-60
A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

The thing is, the ONLY thing that Arbery had been doing was trespassing (no different to what plenty of other people had done in the weeks beforehand). Trespass in this situation, under Georgia Law is a misdemeanour, not a felony. The law is very clear about this - the suspect must be committing, or have committed a felony in order to justify pursuit and citizens arrest, and certainly not pursing the suspect with SUV's and committing vehicular assault.
 
Last edited:
What I find extraordinary is that Bryant didn't just make a deal to throw the McMichaelses under the bus. He could have come at it from the angle that he knew his neighbour was an ex-cop, therefore thought it was reasonable for him to assume what they were doing was legal, if Greg McMichaels said so.

As I said in the posts above, I think that is coming. They will say that if the McMichaels based their pursuit of a citizen's arrest on nothing legal, that doesn't mean Roddy is guilty. He based his pursuit on what he reasonably believed was a former police officer chasing a known suspicious person and that it was reasonable for Roddy to believe that a former police officer would only be doing that if it was lawful. If Greg mischaracterized that pursuit, that is on Greg. Roddy was just doing what he thought was the right thing to legally help capture a criminal in the community.

In terms of plea deal, I don't think there was not much option. This became a big case because the DA tried to sweep this under the rug. A great deal of publicity. I think Roddy had already told all of this to police, so there wouldn't be any plea deal to give up more information. With the public pressure, the new DA would be reluctant to let him off easy.

As I said, that could backfire in terms of Roddy. In the deferred opening they could throw the McMichaels under the bus. Roddy was misled by the McMichaels into thinking this was a lawful arrest when it was not. That is on them. Roddy was just trying to do the right thing.

That may work. He was maybe was a good guy just trying to help catch a felon in the neighborhood. Frankly, if I was a juror and I heard that I would probably have reasonable doubt.

The thing is, the ONLY thing that Arbery had been doing was trespassing (no different to what plenty of other people had done in the weeks beforehand). Trespass in this situation, under Georgia Law is a misdemeanour, not a felony. The law is very clear about this - the suspect must be committing, or have committed a felony in order to justify pursuit and citizens arrest, and certainly not pursing the suspect with SUV's and committing vehicular assault.

It is worse than that. The McMichaels didn't even know that he was trespassing that day. They didn't witness it. According to prosecution, and not contradicted by defense, Greg did not hear anything from the neighbor pointing at Arbery running down the street. Greg said they chased him (and later said they were doing a citizen's arrest) because it looked like he was running away from something and might have hurt somebody or something.

He didn't know where Arbery came from or what he had been doing. He was just, as he said when he called 911, "a black guy is running down the street."

He did no have a probable suspicion of a felony. Or of any other crime. He didn't know he was trespassing. He didn't know anything other than Arbery had been seen wandering around the construction site and that he was now running down the street. He didn't even have knowledge of trespassing on that day.

Greg based his decision to pursue Arbery (only later claiming intent to citizen's arrest) on Arbery being filmed wandering around the site, Travis confronting him a week or two before when he was on the lawn of that site, and that he was a black guy running down the street. He had not witnessed any crime. No probable suspicion of any felony, especially on that day.

Just someone they had seen and thought was maybe suspicious of something and running down the street. So go with trucks and guns and threaten to "blow you head off" and get him "trapped like a rat" and then when trapped kill him with a shotgun. And then say "******* ******".
 
The thing is, the ONLY thing that Arbery had been doing was trespassing (no different to what plenty of other people had done in the weeks beforehand). Trespass in this situation, under Georgia Law is a misdemeanour, not a felony. The law is very clear about this - the suspect must be committing, or have committed a felony in order to justify pursuit and citizens arrest, and certainly not pursing the suspect with SUV's and committing vehicular assault.
This isn't actually true, I'm afraid. You're misreading the text of the law. It is (or was at the time) entirely legal to make a citizen's arrest over a misdemeanor in Georgia. It's just that the burden of proof must be higher - the crime must occur within the arresting individual's "immediate presence or knowledge" vs merely reasonable suspicion for a felony.

(The Georgia bar states this right out if it matters - here)

Of course, any possible trespassing demonstrably did NOT occur within the McMichaels' immediate presence or knowledge, so the distinction is entirely moot, but....
 
Last edited:
Was that not at the very end when Arbery was attacking?

Almost a year now and your entire racist argument is still "Well none of this would have happened if the black man had just passively let the white civilians do whatever they want."
 
It is worse than that. The McMichaels didn't even know that he was trespassing that day. They didn't witness it. According to prosecution, and not contradicted by defense, Greg did not hear anything from the neighbor pointing at Arbery running down the street. Greg said they chased him (and later said they were doing a citizen's arrest) because it looked like he was running away from something and might have hurt somebody or something.

He didn't know where Arbery came from or what he had been doing. He was just, as he said when he called 911, "a black guy is running down the street."

He did no have a probable suspicion of a felony. Or of any other crime. He didn't know he was trespassing. He didn't know anything other than Arbery had been seen wandering around the construction site and that he was now running down the street. He didn't even have knowledge of trespassing on that day.

Greg based his decision to pursue Arbery (only later claiming intent to citizen's arrest) on Arbery being filmed wandering around the site, Travis confronting him a week or two before when he was on the lawn of that site, and that he was a black guy running down the street. He had not witnessed any crime. No probable suspicion of any felony, especially on that day.

Just someone they had seen and thought was maybe suspicious of something and running down the street. So go with trucks and guns and threaten to "blow you head off" and get him "trapped like a rat" and then when trapped kill him with a shotgun. And then say "******* ******".

I haven't been watching the case in real time, but if that's the case (Arbery was not even seen wandering the site on the day of the murder) I can't really see how there's any plausible chance for the accused.

If the entire premise of their chase is that they saw some black guy on some previous surveillance footage and decided to give chase to potentially the same black guy running down the street, then they are well and truly ******.

ETA: I was chastised at some point for the original thread title "running while black", but it's looking like for our killers that was literally true. If the McMichael's did not see him on the construction site the day they decided to murder him, their suspicions were primarily motivated by seeing a young black man running down the street.
 
Last edited:
Again this is all a red herring.

We can argue the minutia of self defense and citizens arrest laws all we want.

We can't create a scenario outside of pure racism why one side of the encounter has the right to defend themselves but the other side didn't.

So that still leaves the side that started and continuously escalated the encounter the wrong side.

Over a year and multiple threads and the argument hasn't advanced one step beyond "Well what kind of world do we live in where three white rednecks in a pickup truck brandishing guns can't run down an unarmed black man on without them fighting back?"
 
Again this is all a red herring.

We can argue the minutia of self defense and citizens arrest laws all we want.

We can't create a scenario outside of pure racism why one side of the encounter has the right to defend themselves but the other side didn't.

So that still leaves the side that started and continuously escalated the encounter the wrong side.

Over a year and multiple threads and the argument hasn't advanced one step beyond "Well what kind of world do we live in where three white rednecks in a pickup truck brandishing guns can't run down an unarmed black man on without them fighting back?"

It's informative to expose the heavy lifting the good ole boy club was doing to hand-wave away a broad daylight murder.

The DA's original letter explaining why the men shouldn't be charged heavily relied on arguments of citizen's arrest. It's telling that, at the slightest bit of prodding, this story completely collapses. Arbery wandering the property on the day of the murder is a red herring as his killers seem to have been unaware of this at the time (if the prosecutor's statement is true).

It will be interesting to compare that DA letter to the facts of the case once this is all done. I imagine it will not look so good.
 
Last edited:
Prosecution has been doing a great job, if you ask me. With the two witnesses I've watched so far, they've addressed the actions of each defendant individually. They haven't tried just a blanket sweep, which is what I was a bit concerned about. The officer that was\is on the stand does not look happy to be there. I think he wanted them to get off, he seems a bit frustrated when he has to read things from the transcript, etc.

I won't be able to hear much else for awhile as I have to program some antminers that are loud as hell.
 
Watching the defense opening statements, I was glad that they drew attention to something which has always seemed very telling to me: the fact that Arbery never spoke a word to the McMichaels.

We heard about how he was offered an opportunity to talk / explain himself with two men who were, at that time, not obviously armed and who were both seated in the cabin of the truck at that time as well.

They were saying "Wait, we want to talk to you. Where are you coming from? What were you doing?" etc.
Your post reminds me of the film, Mars Attacks! The Martians are running around killing people while saying, "Don't run! We are your friends!"

Ranb
 
Watching the defense opening statements, I was glad that they drew attention to something which has always seemed very telling to me: the fact that Arbery never spoke a word to the McMichaels.

We heard about how he was offered an opportunity to talk / explain himself with two men who were, at that time, not obviously armed and who were both seated in the cabin of the truck at that time as well.

They were saying "Wait, we want to talk to you. Where are you coming from? What were you doing?" etc.

I'm a young black man, jogging through a white neighbourhood... in Georgia.

Cletus, Bubba and Billy-Bob are chasing me - they are armed, and they have been hitting me with their their pickup trucks as they try to run me off the road..... and you think I should stop and talk to them? Really?
 
Ah yes the mythical "Why did the black guy act like the armed white mob was a threat?" defense.
 
Didn't Arbery have the right to defend himself against gun toting people trying to run him off the road with a vehicle?

You'll never get an answer to that question from him. It will destroy his narrative.
 
Are you telling me the young men claiming to be "wallet inspectors" might intend to do me harm? I just don't believe it! Surely we all know it's best to just trust assertive strangers making demands of us in public. /s

Somehow I don't think Arberry had much trouble figuring out a posse of rednecks stalking him down the street didn't have anything nice in store for him.
 
Last edited:
Also none of the aggressors told the first officer on the scene they were making a Citizens Arrest, which would have been the first words out of my mouth had a shot someone while making a Citizens Arrest. I'd also be at least pretending to at least look like I was trying to do something that resembled basic first aid.

The "Citizens Arrest" thing is something they made up after the fact to save their asses.

Even ignoring the fact that nothing were doing meet the standards for Citizens Arrests.

So yet again we've got a dead black guy and 90% of the discussion is hairsplitting a legal definition that doesn't even apply to to what happened, just like Stand Your Ground with Zimmerman and Castle Defense with little miss Officer Tired N' Horny.

We might as well be debating whether or not you get all the money when you land on Free Parking in Monopoly. It has as much to do with the case.
 
Last edited:
Didn't Arbery have the right to defend himself against gun toting people trying to run him off the road with a vehicle?

Skeptic Tank has made it quite clear that in his racist view the black man was at fault - regardless of anything else. They will also probably say that a black person can’t live in a society with their kind of “whites”.
 
Defense is trying to get the judge to let them say the McMichael's thought that Arbury was armed, but it doesn't look like the judge is going to play along. Something about "in the interest of completeness". The volume in these two trials (Rittenhouse and this one) is completely sporadic. Next to impossible to get consistent sound.
 
I do love that (for the most part) Judges aren't too keen on letting "Alternative Universe Fan Fiction where the black guy was/could have been doing something differently" arguments that fill the internet into the courtroom.
 
Last edited:
I do love that (for the most part) Judges aren't too keen on letting "Alternative Universe Fan Fiction where the black guy was/could have been doing something differently" arguments that fill the internet into the courtroom.

Listening to more of the conversation. It looks like, if I'm getting it right, a black man that was in the area the night before stuck his hand in his pants? The judge told the defense they're going to have to try and find another way to get that in because the question is "Does Arbery have a gun?"

Which as we all know, he didn't. The judge is getting a bit frustrated with the defense at this point.
 
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.
 

Back
Top Bottom