Jogging in Georgia while black.

[dejudge]

It's an open construction site in his neighborhood. He was looking around. And where do you get "sirens?" He was attacked in the street by two civilians. What sirens? And neither the police or the current prosecutor says he did anything wrong. The only people making that claim are the killers.

Does the construction site belong to the McMichaels? Did they know if the jogger was given permission to enter the site?

The actions of the jogger and authority to go inside the construction were unknown to the McMichaels at the time so they must have fabricated lies about trespassing in order to ambush and execute him.

 

[JoeMorgue]

GBI arrests man for making online threats toward Arbery-related protests

https://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/...A9PD80fz4mpyNO67b-inlx6EGAyDs5H-wuxaAHwPyLUe8

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Does the construction site belong to the McMichaels? Did they know if the jogger was given permission to enter the site?

The actions of the jogger and authority to go inside the construction were unknown to the McMichaels at the time so they must have fabricated lies about trespassing in order to ambush and execute him.

Everything I’ve heard indicates that they knew the guy building the house and were familiar with his previous thefts he’d endured. I’ve actually been wondering if they possibly had access to the video feed or even installed the security camera in there for him. Time will tell.

Let’s say they were wildly off base though, and Ahmaud was just looking around or even had permission. Okay, those sorts of misunderstandings are usually cleared up with conversation maybe with police adjudicating. Not by fists and bullets flying, which is what Ahmaud chose to force it to come to.

 

[Meadmaker]

Let’s say they were wildly off base though, and Ahmaud was just looking around or even had permission. Okay, those sorts of misunderstandings are usually cleared up with conversation maybe with police adjudicating. Not by fists and bullets flying, which is what Ahmaud chose to force it to come to.

Assuming, of course, that Travis McMichael did not point a shotgun at him.

You keep overlooking that possibility, but it really is the entire key to this whole issue.

 

[William Parcher]

I don't think that these guys had any intention of executing or murdering Arbery and the reason is because they made a call to 911 summoning the police right before they took off after him. That doesn't seem like the thing to do if you are about to execute somebody... at least not if you want to somehow get away with it and not be charged with murder. They don't even know when the cops are going to show up. A patrol car could be close when they get the call from dispatch. So they might need to do this execution very quickly and they don't even have full control of Arbery in order to do it immediately.

We're they planning to plant a gun on Arbery in order to justify killing him?

It just doesn't seem like a plan for execution/murder In the street when you've already called the cops to get their asses over there to the same street.

This is my opinion.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Given the popularity of the theft angle as mitigation, Walmart loss prevention should consider the installation of automated laser turrets to deal with shoplifters. Hire companies could add portable units to their inventory for construction site use. Summary execution sure would make would be thieves think twice.

Coming soon to an American hyper capitalist dystopia.

 

[Sideroxylon]

I don't think that these guys had any intention of executing or murdering Arbery and the reason is because they made a call to 911 summoning the police right before they took off after him. That doesn't seem like the thing to do if you are about to execute somebody... at least not if you want to somehow get away with it and not be charged with murder. They don't even know when the cops are going to show up. A patrol car could be close when they get the call from dispatch. So they might need to do this execution very quickly and they don't even have full control of Arbery in order to do it immediately.

We're they planning to plant a gun on Arbery in order to justify killing him?

It just doesn't seem like a plan for execution/murder In the street when you've already called the cops to get their asses over there to the same street.

This is my opinion.

Recipe for the perfect crime right there. Call 911 ahead of time. Bet it has been done that way too.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Everything I’ve heard indicates that they knew the guy building the house and were familiar with his previous thefts he’d endured. I’ve actually been wondering if they possibly had access to the video feed or even installed the security camera in there for him. Time will tell.

Let’s say they were wildly off base though, and Ahmaud was just looking around or even had permission. Okay, those sorts of misunderstandings are usually cleared up with conversation maybe with police adjudicating. Not by fists and bullets flying, which is what Ahmaud chose to force it to come to.

I thought I heard somewhere that the guy who was having the house built said he had never had anything stolen in the past, but I could be mistaken. Are you sure he has, and where did you hear it?

 

[JoeMorgue]

We're they planning to plant a gun on Arbery in order to justify killing him?

Why would they have to? It's only a stroke of luck that they even got charged.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Assuming, of course, that Travis McMichael did not point a shotgun at him.

You keep overlooking that possibility, but it really is the entire key to this whole issue.

I've heard it spoken so many times already that Travis McMichael pointed a shotgun at him, I almost didn't realize that the video of the incident doesn't even show it happening.

And yes, that is definitely a key piece of information in this story.

Another thing I have been wondering about is if there is any evidence that Ahmaud was jogging before the incident. I know he's running in the video of the incident, and he ran out of the house, but i'm not aware of any evidence that he was out running or jogging before that.

 

[dejudge]

Everything I’ve heard indicates that they knew the guy building the house and were familiar with his previous thefts he’d endured. I’ve actually been wondering if they possibly had access to the video feed or even installed the security camera in there for him. Time will tell.

Let’s say there were wildly off base though, and Ahmaud was just looking around or even had permission. Okay, those sorts of misunderstandings are usually cleared up with conversation maybe with police adjudicating. Not by fists and bullets flying, which is what Ahmaud chose to force it to come to.

So far, there is no justification whatsoever for the McMichaels to have ambushed and execute the jogger.

It appears that they are not the owner of the site and did not know what he was doing when he was inside the building.

Now where the McMichaels when the jogger entered the construction site? Did they actually see him enter the building or were they told that he entered after they had murdered him?

The 911 calls are extremely important because it appears that there were 2 calls.

What is the identity of the first 911 caller who stated that he sees the jogger leaving the site while talking to the operator?

The first caller gave the address of area of the construction site as 219 or 220 Satilla Drive.

Now, listen to the second 911 caller!!

What does the 2nd caller say??

911 Operator "911 what's your address your emergency

Caller "I am at Satilla Shores .......There is a black male running down the street.....911 Operator " Where at Satilla Shores ?"

Caller "I don't which street we're on.
911 Operator " Hello Sir where you at ? Hello, Hello......

The caller stopped responding .

The murderers are lying!!

The second 911 call reveals the jogger was ambushed and murdered simply because he was a black male running down the street.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Can I just check peoples thinking here? From whatever side of the racist argument you stand, could you confirm whether you are of the opinion that Arbery was going to be shot even if he hadn't have made an attempt to wrest the shot gun from McMichael?

I ask because that seems to be a bit of a creeping narrative?

Can we first address what Arbery would have thought the intent of the man with the shotgun was?

Do you stand there and risk getting shot or do you fight back? Someone puts a shotgun in your face, what's the likely reaction? You push it away so it isn't pointed at you.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

New video shows Arbery inside house. He didn't take anything or break anything.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/georg...ng-additional-video-in-case-of-ahmaud-arbery/

He was obviously casing the joint.

As for Arbery perusing a house under construction, I've done that hundreds of times. It's normal curiosity to want to see what they are building in one's neighborhood.

I even go up the stairs if the stairs are built.

 

[Meadmaker]

I've heard it spoken so many times already that Travis McMichael pointed a shotgun at him, I almost didn't realize that the video of the incident doesn't even show it happening.

There is considerable dispute about that. As Arbery is quite a ways, several car lengths at least, away from the truck, Travis McMichael does....something.

The grainy footage makes it hard to see exactly what he does. However, it appears to me that both elbows are raised, one of them is in front of the body, and one is to the side, while he feet are pointed perpendicular to the line between him and Arbery, while his head is pointed directly at Arbery.

In other words, he is standing just the way you would stand if you happened to be aiming a shotgun at Arbery.

Perhaps you are thinking that I, or others, are referring to the start of the physical altercation when Arbery rushed at McMichael in front of the pickup truck? At that point, we cannot see the position of McMichael to know whether or not he is pointing the shotgun at Arbery. It is the point moments earlier, when Arbery is still approaching the truck, that is the key point. If Travis McMichael was aiming a shotgun at him, then any subsequent action would be considered reasonable self defense.

That's so important to the prosecution of the McMichaels because it really does matter at what point someone committed a crime. In the messed up world of Georgia and much of the rest of America, standing with a loaded shotgun while saying, "I want to talk to you." is legal. However, "brandishing" the weapon, or aiming it at another person, is not legal. If McMichael aimed the gun at Arbery, then everything that happened afterwards is a consequence of the crime that McMichael committed by pointing the shotgun, and thus a murder charge is consistent with normal application of the law. If, on the other hand, all of the McMichaels' actions were legal, then Arbery would have no justification for attacking Travis McMichael, and it would be reasonable for McMichael to defend himself, including with lethal force.

That's what the case will be all about. Did Travis McMichael illegally threaten Ahmaud Arbery, or did Ahmaud Arbery illegally assault Travis McMichael.

Their ability to convince a jury that they did not threaten Arbery will determine whether they will spend the rest of their lives as free men.




I should say, that relates to Travis McMichael, but I'm not sure about the elder McMichael. In the same frame where Travis appears to be pointing the shotgun at Arbery, Ed (is it Ed? I'm talking about the dad.) appears to be pointing a handgun at Arbery, so the same justification applies. Otherwise, I don't see how the father could also be charged with murder. If, however, he pointed the gun at Arbery, it would make sense to charge him with murder.

 

[p0lka]

Thank the **** I live in a place where I don't have to worry about being judged as the baddy because I didn't act correctly when nobodies are putting guns in my face.

My sympathies to anyone that does.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

That's what the case will be all about. Did Travis McMichael illegally threaten Ahmaud Arbery, or did Ahmaud Arbery illegally assault Travis McMichael.

Their ability to convince a jury that they did not threaten Arbery will determine whether they will spend the rest of their lives as free men.

Yeah, that's my understanding as well. I'm just not as caught up on the details of the case as many others probably are, and I have interest in other aspects of the incident as well even though they have to bearing on the case.

 

[Mike!]

Recipe for the perfect crime right there. Call 911 ahead of time. Bet it has been done that way too.

I know it's been tried at least. In a community about 40 miles south of me, a guy murdered his wife and kids so he could run off with a stripper. He had been sending himself threatening letters for 6 months prior to the killing. The day he did it, he called 911 and told them he was afraid for his family because no one was answering the phone at home, and he was hurring there himself. Part of how they proved he'd done it was how his cellphone moved after the call. He didn't rush home, he drove around somewhat aimlessly in order to insure the cops got there first, in hopes of cementing his alibi. He's spending life plus in prison now.

 

[whoanellie]

There is considerable dispute about that. As Arbery is quite a ways, several car lengths at least, away from the truck, Travis McMichael does....something.

The grainy footage makes it hard to see exactly what he does. However, it appears to me that both elbows are raised, one of them is in front of the body, and one is to the side, while he feet are pointed perpendicular to the line between him and Arbery, while his head is pointed directly at Arbery.

In other words, he is standing just the way you would stand if you happened to be aiming a shotgun at Arbery.

Perhaps you are thinking that I, or others, are referring to the start of the physical altercation when Arbery rushed at McMichael in front of the pickup truck? At that point, we cannot see the position of McMichael to know whether or not he is pointing the shotgun at Arbery. It is the point moments earlier, when Arbery is still approaching the truck, that is the key point. If Travis McMichael was aiming a shotgun at him, then any subsequent action would be considered reasonable self defense.

That's so important to the prosecution of the McMichaels because it really does matter at what point someone committed a crime. In the messed up world of Georgia and much of the rest of America, standing with a loaded shotgun while saying, "I want to talk to you." is legal. However, "brandishing" the weapon, or aiming it at another person, is not legal. If McMichael aimed the gun at Arbery, then everything that happened afterwards is a consequence of the crime that McMichael committed by pointing the shotgun, and thus a murder charge is consistent with normal application of the law. If, on the other hand, all of the McMichaels' actions were legal, then Arbery would have no justification for attacking Travis McMichael, and it would be reasonable for McMichael to defend himself, including with lethal force.

That's what the case will be all about. Did Travis McMichael illegally threaten Ahmaud Arbery, or did Ahmaud Arbery illegally assault Travis McMichael.

Their ability to convince a jury that they did not threaten Arbery will determine whether they will spend the rest of their lives as free men.




I should say, that relates to Travis McMichael, but I'm not sure about the elder McMichael. In the same frame where Travis appears to be pointing the shotgun at Arbery, Ed (is it Ed? I'm talking about the dad.) appears to be pointing a handgun at Arbery, so the same justification applies. Otherwise, I don't see how the father could also be charged with murder. If, however, he pointed the gun at Arbery, it would make sense to charge him with murder.

Excellent post. When I've looked at the video in slow motion at high definition and on a larger screen it is rather clear that Travis raises his gun and points it at Arbery. I can't see the gun itself but all of Travis's actions and Arbery's reactions are consistent with the raising of the gun. In particular I see Travis's bare left forearm rise up and in front as though aiming at Arbery.
This is before the confrontation itself, before Arbery ever gets to the truck, before Travis moves away from the driver's door.

 

[Bob001]

Okay, I found the quoted recusal letter of Attorney General Barnhill in which he said that his son and Gregory McMichael had worked together and that both of them had even helped with the prior prosecution of Ahmaud Abery. ...who had both a juvenile and adult felony record.

The rest of the letter is quoted in this article:

https://www.live5news.com/2020/05/07/gbi-men-charged-with-murder-ahmaud-arbery/

Let's note what his record is:

When he was in high school, Arbery was sentenced to five years probation as a first offender on charges of carrying a weapon on campus and several counts of obstructing a law enforcement officer. He was convicted of probation violation in 2018 after he was charged with shoplifting, court documents show.

https://www.ajc.com/news/local/brun...hooting/JkpbvTuJt9wfl3tkcLTTvO/?via=webuproar

So that's all they've got? And we don't even know if he was actually convicted of shoplifting. This is hardly the record of a hardened criminal, certainly no justification for killing him in the street.

 

[whoanellie]

There is considerable dispute about that. As Arbery is quite a ways, several car lengths at least, away from the truck, Travis McMichael does....something.

The grainy footage makes it hard to see exactly what he does. However, it appears to me that both elbows are raised, one of them is in front of the body, and one is to the side, while he feet are pointed perpendicular to the line between him and Arbery, while his head is pointed directly at Arbery.

In other words, he is standing just the way you would stand if you happened to be aiming a shotgun at Arbery.

Perhaps you are thinking that I, or others, are referring to the start of the physical altercation when Arbery rushed at McMichael in front of the pickup truck? At that point, we cannot see the position of McMichael to know whether or not he is pointing the shotgun at Arbery. It is the point moments earlier, when Arbery is still approaching the truck, that is the key point. If Travis McMichael was aiming a shotgun at him, then any subsequent action would be considered reasonable self defense.

That's so important to the prosecution of the McMichaels because it really does matter at what point someone committed a crime. In the messed up world of Georgia and much of the rest of America, standing with a loaded shotgun while saying, "I want to talk to you." is legal. However, "brandishing" the weapon, or aiming it at another person, is not legal. If McMichael aimed the gun at Arbery, then everything that happened afterwards is a consequence of the crime that McMichael committed by pointing the shotgun, and thus a murder charge is consistent with normal application of the law. If, on the other hand, all of the McMichaels' actions were legal, then Arbery would have no justification for attacking Travis McMichael, and it would be reasonable for McMichael to defend himself, including with lethal force.

That's what the case will be all about. Did Travis McMichael illegally threaten Ahmaud Arbery, or did Ahmaud Arbery illegally assault Travis McMichael.

Their ability to convince a jury that they did not threaten Arbery will determine whether they will spend the rest of their lives as free men.




I should say, that relates to Travis McMichael, but I'm not sure about the elder McMichael. In the same frame where Travis appears to be pointing the shotgun at Arbery, Ed (is it Ed? I'm talking about the dad.) appears to be pointing a handgun at Arbery, so the same justification applies. Otherwise, I don't see how the father could also be charged with murder. If, however, he pointed the gun at Arbery, it would make sense to charge him with murder.

As to your last question about why the father is charged, if two people rob a bank and one shoots the teller both are guilty of murder.
Here is a case where 3 people went to rob a drug dealer. The drug dealer shot one of the robbers in self defense and the other 2 robbers were charged with his murder.
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1346679/state-v-jackson/