Jogging in Georgia while black.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ranb said:
At the extreme close range of the last shot, the shot shell wad is just starting to open and the pellets of any size are still in a tiny group. There was a stain on Arbery's shirt side/back as he fell. I think buckshot or bird shot was used and it completely penetrated the side of his abdomen.
Click to expand...


You're an authority on firearms whose expert opinion I respect.

But, having said that, there's a big difference between buck shot and bird shot. Even at close range would the wound be almost the same?
 
Again these events happened months ago and we're just hearing about it now.

There are simply no words for how disingenuous this is.

The narrative the shooters are trying to sell to us is that this is all Arbery's fault for being involved in this "crimewave" of break-ins, thefts, and trespassings.

But they never reported the crimes until after the shooting and the local authorities didn't even investigate the crimes he was supposedly shot over either before or after he was shot for them.

But now that McMichaels and local authorities are in the spotlight, we're suddenly seeing security cam footage? Now we have to investigate the crimes? This isn't closing the barn door after the horses have left, it's closes the barn door after you shot the horses.

Again nobody gave a flying **** about the crimes Arberny was supposed to have been committing before they shot him or after they shot them. They only cared when it let them shot him.

Absolute horsecrap.
 
Last edited:
whoanellie said:
Yes it was the same day. There is a much longer video posted above from a different camera showing Arbery entering the construction site. another person coming from across the street (calling 911?), Arbery leaving the site, and police cars arriving. Police arrived within a couple of minutes. The posse didn't need to take matters into their own hands.
Click to expand...


All they need is the recordings from the bunch of nighttime burglaries they claim to have seen. The ones that were never reported.

Should be a simple matter to produce them.

I don't find a daylight recording of someone looking at a construction site to be particularly damning.
 
Again the number of people who aren't even hiding the fact that they are keeping their fingers crossed that Arberny winds up being involved in some crime, any crime because it makes his murder okay is sickening. And yes that is exactly what some people are doing, don't insult our intelligence by pretending otherwise.
 
Bob001 said:
I haven't seen any close-ups. Apparently three shots were fired. Was this a semiauto or a pump? If it was a pump, who racked it twice? Even if it went off once during a struggle, the next two shots had to be deliberate.
Click to expand...


Part of the action is outside the camera frame. The three shots are separated enough that they could indicate a pump-action was being racked. If so, that would imply a level of deliberation and intent to kill, not an "accident" during a "struggle."
 
Bob001 said:
Part of the action is outside the camera frame. The three shots are separated enough that they could indicate a pump-action was being racked. If so, that would imply a level of deliberation and intent to kill, not an "accident" during a "struggle."
Click to expand...
I agree. Eventually we'll learn more about the gun.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Again the number of people who aren't even hiding the fact that they are keeping their fingers crossed that Arberny winds up being involved in some crime, any crime because it makes his murder okay is sickening. And yes that is exactly what some people are doing, don't insult our intelligence by pretending otherwise.
Click to expand...

Some people, of course, are just content to assume that he was involved in some crime and that therefore shooting him was okay. They'll even brand him a "violent criminal" and paint shooting him as a civic necessity.
 
What I've gleaned from various reports is that there were 3 shots in total. One before the struggle and two during. At least 2 from the handgun wielded by the son. I'm not sure that any are said to have come from the shotgun.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Again the number of people who aren't even hiding the fact that they are keeping their fingers crossed that Arberny winds up being involved in some crime, any crime because it makes his murder okay is sickening. And yes that is exactly what some people are doing, don't insult our intelligence by pretending otherwise.
Click to expand...

Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Some people, of course, are just content to assume that he was involved in some crime and that therefore shooting him was okay. They'll even brand him a "violent criminal" and paint shooting him as a civic necessity.
Click to expand...

From the first time I saw the video, without any information yet about burglary or anything like that, I knew that what had caused him to be shot and killed was the assault he launched on the younger McMichael which was right there in the video. I have been puzzled at people saying how damning the video is and how it should have led to charges months ago. The DA's decision and letter made perfect sense to me, and accorded with what I thought upon viewing #1 of the video.

Naturally, no matter what else was going on here, he was going to get shot when he charged the man with the shotgun, punched him, and tried to take the gun.

Squeegee Beckenheim said:
What I've gleaned from various reports is that there were 3 shots in total. One before the struggle and two during. At least 2 from the handgun wielded by the son. I'm not sure that any are said to have come from the shotgun.
Click to expand...

The handgun was held by the father who was in the bed of the pickup, all shots came from the shotgun wielded by the son who was on foot and had been driving the truck - at least that's my understanding.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Some people, of course, are just content to assume that he was involved in some crime and that therefore shooting him was okay. They'll even brand him a "violent criminal" and paint shooting him as a civic necessity.
Click to expand...

It's important to remember that police lied to Arberny's mother and originally told her that her son had been killed while in the process of committing a crime.

The "But he's a criminal!" narrative started immediately.
 
JoeMorgue said:
It's important to remember that police lied to Arberny's mother and originally told her that her son had been killed while in the process of committing a crime.

The "But he's a criminal!" narrative started immediately.
Click to expand...

It could be that the police official who communicated that to her was passing along his best understanding of what had happened, it's not exactly a wildly off base way to characterize things given what we know.

Or it could be that she misunderstood what was said. Hard to say.

Honestly, even if a cop said exactly that to her, I think it's kind of a fair way to characterize what went down.
 
JoeMorgue said:
It's important to remember that police lied to Arberny's mother and originally told her that her son had been killed while in the process of committing a crime.

The "But he's a criminal!" narrative started immediately.
Click to expand...

Everything appears to be lies. He did not commit a crime nor was in the process of committing a crime based on the released videos. The police may all be involved in a cover-up of the murder of the jogger.

If the McMichaels were not already inside the constructing site they would have no idea what he was doing when he entered the property.

They must have been lying when they claimed he was committing a crime after he entered the site.
 
Could be could be could be....it's almost as if maybe saying there's no call for a trial to straighten it out is perhaps not the best way to get it all sorted.

I mean, why waste time with a trial when there are still some juicy maybes on the pile?
 
Bob001 said:
Part of the action is outside the camera frame. The three shots are separated enough that they could indicate a pump-action was being racked. If so, that would imply a level of deliberation and intent to kill, not an "accident" during a "struggle."
Click to expand...

whoanellie said:
I agree. Eventually we'll learn more about the gun.
Click to expand...

I asked about this some pages up thread, as I was thinking/wondering the same, but it's established there is such a thing as a semi-auto shotgun that uses the recoil of a shot to eject and reload with a racking action. We don't know that's 100% the case here, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.

Squeegee Beckenheim said:
What I've gleaned from various reports is that there were 3 shots in total. One before the struggle and two during. At least 2 from the handgun wielded by the son. I'm not sure that any are said to have come from the shotgun.
Click to expand...

Three shots, all from the shotgun. It's reported the first shot struck Arbrey in the hand (My assumption is he was trying to push the barrel away, not grabbing it.), second shot went, more or less, up during the struggle. Third shot was the fatal one to his chest.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Tank said:
From the first time I saw the video, without any information yet about burglary or anything like that, I knew that what had caused him to be shot and killed was the assault he launched on the younger McMichael which was right there in the video.
....
Click to expand...

"Launched an assault?" Or did he try to defend himself against armed attackers? You are clinging to the premise that two gunslinging thugs had a right to stop him, confront him and threaten him. They did not.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
Some possibilities:

1.) It was some other tool, not fit for use as a weapon
2.) It fell out of his pants and was not dropped intentionally
3.) He was focused on ditching evidence and not thinking about it as a possible weapon at that time, and did not think he'd end up in a physical fight with the men in the truck
4.) He felt it was inhibiting his running and his focus was on ditching it for that reason

I have no idea what the tool was, if he brought it or stole it, dropped it on purpose or not, or if it ever crossed his mind to use it as a weapon or if it would have been viable as one.

On the video, it seems to be on the ground a good ways prior to where the confrontation ended up happening.
Click to expand...

5) He did not realize the squirrel had expired, and was hoping that because it was a black squirrel it would attack the white men.
 
Mike! said:
I asked about this some pages up thread, as I was thinking/wondering the same, but it's established there is such a thing as a semi-auto shotgun that uses the recoil of a shot to eject and reload with a racking action. We don't know that's 100% the case here, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.
....
Click to expand...

There's nothing uncommon or mysterious about semi-auto shotguns. My point was that the three shots are spaced far enough apart to indicate the possibility of operating a slide, rather than the three quick shots that you might expect from a semi-auto with someone's finger on the trigger during a struggle.
 
It's pointless really. Wait for the court. Making quit judgements based on few leaks is hardly justice. And it can actually hinder with justice.
Often groundbreaking new facts are revealed during the court. All the rage, all the rallies are then for nothing. Or just exposing the ignorance.
We can protest against racism. But nobody can call 'he was innocent' or 'they are innocent'. That's just silly. We can't know that.
There is a reason why court is hearing of both sides, with attorneys. All evidence has to be sorted one by one with both sides being able to address it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom