Jogging in Georgia while black.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skeptic Tank said:
You guys are going to hang your hat on lack of official police reports only to sit here a year from now as 5 witnesses in a row sit on the stand describing a string of things being stolen around that neighborhood.

That's my prediction.
Click to expand...

I am not sure of the relevance. Even if he was a thief, is killing someone a reasonable response to theft?
 
Bob001 said:
I dunno. Where is Travis' house in relation to the construction site? It weakens the McMichaels' flimsy defense even more if neither of them made that first 911 call.
Click to expand...

Its actually fatal to them if they didn't make the first call, and pretty redeeming if they did.

If they did, they were reporting to police as they should. Then Arbery bolted and they went cowboy, to a horrific end. But it rules out "****** hunting", as so many claim. It was more likely an impulse chase. Still illegal, still wrong, but motivated differently.

If they didn't make the first call, they were vigilantes right out of the gate. To hell with them.

If they made the second call, again, they are trying to get the police there. But the hanging up (presumably after the shooting) is chilling. Especially if the phone was muted on purpose. That's damning.

If they didn't make the second call, someone else who knew Travis was a witness, gone quiet.

Eta: or Roddy, the filmer? Recording video might account for the muting

Eta 2: oh hell yeah. Roddy was caller #2. Accounts for everything
 
Last edited:
Thermal said:
'My confusion' is not the issue. I asked if you were sure about a factual matter. The truth was, you were assuming but claiming factual. Not the first time. You'll also note in the stricken part, you get again make a factual claim about seeing a caller, which really you just read somewhere. We get points for accuracy around these here parts, cowboy.
Click to expand...

Your confusion is certainly the issue. That the police have redacted the caller's identity now does not mean it wasn't known before.

Let me know when you get any points for accuracy. I'll make a special note if it ever happens.
 
wareyin said:
Your confusion is certainly the issue. That the police have redacted the caller's identity now does not mean it wasn't known before.

Let me know when you get any points for accuracy. I'll make a special note if it ever happens.
Click to expand...

Oh for Christ's sake, their identities have been redacted from the beginning. Why does every post you make have to misrepresent simple facts? Seriously, like four lies in your last three posts, all pointless.
 
Bob001 said:
I dunno. Where is Travis' house in relation to the construction site? It weakens the McMichaels' flimsy defense even more if neither of them made that first 911 call.
Click to expand...

According to the police report Travis McMichaels lives at 230 Satilla. According to google maps, that address is 500 yards from the construction site. The first caller didn't know the address of the construction site, giving it as 219 or 220 Satilla. The addresses are across the street from each other, and as they follow normal American street address customs, the 220 address would have been on the same side of the street as Travis McMichael's house, while 219 would have been across the street. Gregory McMichaels claims he was in Travis' front yard when he saw Arbery running (not that he saw trespass) and that Gregory ran inside to call to Travis "Travis the guy is running down the
street lets go".

By his police statement Gregory didn't see the trespass, and Travis couldn't have seen the trespass according to that testimony. In addition Travis would have known the address based on which side of the street it was, and the first caller did not.
 
Thermal said:
Oh for Christ's sake, their identities have been redacted from the beginning. Why does every post you make have to misrepresent simple facts? Seriously, like four lies in your last three posts, all pointless.
Click to expand...

Dang, no points for you yet, chief? We have the chase video showing Gregory on the phone, and nobody else close enough to have caught the sounds of the scuffle on the 911 phone call. In addition the second caller knew Travis' name. But you just don't know who it was, do you? :rolleyes:
 
wareyin said:
Dang, no points for you yet, chief? We have the chase video showing Gregory on the phone, and nobody else close enough to have caught the sounds of the scuffle on the 911 phone call. In addition the second caller knew Travis' name. But you just don't know who it was, do you? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Roddy. The filmer. Who's phone muted when he fumbled with the phone to start recording. And that's why police are redacting his name. He's a cooperating witness, not an accused.
 
Thermal said:
Roddy. The filmer. Who's phone muted when he fumbled with the phone to start recording. And that's why police are redacting his name. He's a cooperating witness, not an accused.
Click to expand...

No, Roddy was filming in the chase car. He wasn't close enough to get the scuffle over the phone call. You want to try again?
 
Bob001 said:
You don't think the police don't know who made what calls, do you?
Click to expand...

I'm certain that the police know just as well as we do (well, we except for Thermal) who the second caller was. The first, they probably do, but we don't know the entire neighborhood like they do. We can only speculate that he was Roddy (possible) or Travis (which contradicts the report Gregory gave to police at the scene).

eta: maybe English? But he would have known his own address and wasn't worried about the trespassing so probably not.
 
Last edited:
Thermal said:
Its actually fatal to them if they didn't make the first call, and pretty redeeming if they did.
....
Click to expand...

"Redeeming?" It might get them off a hate crime charge. But they had no right to pursue, confront and kill anybody. I would be surprised if this isn't plea-bargained. Manslaughter can get 20 years in GA.
 
wareyin said:
I'm certain that the police know just as well as we do (well, we except for Thermal) who the second caller was. The first, they probably do, but we don't know the entire neighborhood like they do. We can only speculate that he was Roddy (possible) or Travis (which contradicts the report Gregory gave to police at the scene).

eta: maybe English? But he would have known his own address and wasn't worried about the trespassing so probably not.
Click to expand...

In the audio of the first call, the dispatcher asks the caller his name and address. The answers are deleted from the audio, but as he was playing Good Citizen I presume the caller answered honestly.
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
"Redeeming?" It might get them off a hate crime charge. But they had no right to pursue, confront and kill anybody. I would be surprised if this isn't plea-bargained. Manslaughter can get 20 years in GA.
Click to expand...

Little bit redeeming. Shows they intended for police to handle it, at least at the beginning. Agreed, no right to do what they did afterwards, not any of it.
 
wareyin said:
I'm certain that the police know just as well as we do (well, we except for Thermal) who the second caller was. The first, they probably do, but we don't know the entire neighborhood like they do. We can only speculate that he was Roddy (possible) or Travis (which contradicts the report Gregory gave to police at the scene).

eta: maybe English? But he would have known his own address and wasn't worried about the trespassing so probably not.
Click to expand...

According to his lawyer, English was home in Douglas (Georgia) the day of the incident and he didn't make a 911 call. (Apparently Douglas is a little over 80 miles away from Brunswick, btw.)

The lawyer also said, though, that in months prior English had reported to the police having seen in video someone on the property in question. So, maybe he was a bit worried about trespassing - at least before trying to distance himself from this incident.

...English had no involvement with “the senseless killing” of Arbery and he did not call 911 the day of the incident, she said. He was in Douglas, where English, 50, lives with his family.

The report he made to police in the months before the incident was on a non-emergency line and he reported that his motion-sensor camera taped someone on the property, but there was no evidence of anything taken, Graddy said.
Click to expand...

https://www.ajc.com/news/local/arbe...w-investigations-next/5aCejAF1AB23ZiDRFNHZrK/
 
Darat said:
It's in the lack of reported burglaries in the area and now we can add in the statements from the owner of the construction site, we know that the murderers lied about that.
Click to expand...

I think there was some jumbling of information by the new. Gregory did not say there were burglaries. He said there were break-ins. That's in the police report. And he said the suspect had been caught on video. One of the 911 callers said the same thing.

There had been some thefts (not burglaries) 8-10 weeks ago. One was a gun taken from a a truck outside Travis's house (I thin kit might have been his truck and gun.) The other might have been fishing gear taken from the house under construction.

But I don't see anything that shows that either of the McMichaels said that there was a burglary suspect caught on video. The police report says break-ins.

I would assume the "break-ins" he is referring to is the "trespassing" on the house with construction. And the videos are the videos that the home owner actually has. I assume the McMichaels knew about those "break-ins" and the videos, and maybe had even seen the videos. The house was only a few doors down the street.
 
Shepherd said:
According to his lawyer, English was home in Douglas (Georgia) the day of the incident and he didn't make a 911 call. (Apparently Douglas is a little over 80 miles away from Brunswick, btw.)

The lawyer also said, though, that in months prior English had reported to the police having seen in video someone on the property in question. So, maybe he was a bit worried about trespassing - at least before trying to distance himself from this incident.



https://www.ajc.com/news/local/arbe...w-investigations-next/5aCejAF1AB23ZiDRFNHZrK/
Click to expand...

But the Daily Beast says that English confirmed the robbery of fishing equipment earlier this year, but says he didn't report it.

Barnhill did not elaborate on what that probable cause was or how he’d reached that conclusion, although two thefts had occurred in the neighborhood in the first two months of the year. One was a theft of $2,500 worth of fishing equipment from English’s property, which he said he didn’t report to police but confirmed to The Daily Beast.
Click to expand...
 
DevilsAdvocate said:
I would assume the "break-ins" he is referring to is the "trespassing" on the house with construction. And the videos are the videos that the home owner actually has. I assume the McMichaels knew about those "break-ins" and the videos, and maybe had even seen the videos. The house was only a few doors down the street.
Click to expand...

Okay. And?

You don't get to do the whole "citizens arrest" routine because you heard about some misdemeanors at your neighbor's house.

3 or 4 people have pointed out multiple times and the apologist have just aggressively stuck their fingers in their ears going "La la la I can't hear you la la la." In Georgia you are only allowed to "citizens arrest" people who you directly see committing or fleeing from a felony.

The entire basis for this entire line of hair splitting and nitpicking over the details of the shooters excuse narrative is just spitting on the grave of the murdered man because it doesn't matter.

Even in the McMichael's own version of the story it was a vigilante murder, not a citizens arrest gone bad.
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
Okay. And?
Click to expand...

And...it contradicts Darat claim that the McMichaels were lying about the break-ins and video and that they were chasing down what they believed was a criminal suspect and were just going after some random jogger because he was a black man in their neighborhood.

They chased him down because they thought he was a criminal based on the break-ins and the video. I do not think they are lying about that as Darat claimed.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom