(05-12-2020, 10:25 AM)Byron LeftTown Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 09:57 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]They admittedly tried to cut him off with their truck multiple times. Someone you don't know tries to run you down with their car several times and you really don't think you'd perceive it as an attack and try to run away? Then they get in front of you and get out with a [BLEEP] shotgun and you think their intentions are kosher? You guys have lost your minds.
True statement is in green.
False statement is in red.
That you are incapable of seeing how the first statement contributes to the victim's perception of the second one tells us all we need to know about your analysis.
Tell me the difference between this shooting, and the Trayvon Martin shooting. Guy with a gun follows person he believes may be committing a crime. Man with a gun follows Trayvon Martin … Martin attacks the guy with a gun that is following him and gets shot. The main difference is a video.
It is not illegal to follow someone. Well, unless a Judge has ruled on such a stalking, or distance requirement.
I could see this ending the same way it did in the George Zimmerman outcome. I hope not, but I can’t recognize how this is wildly different.
(05-12-2020, 11:00 AM)Olive Wrote: [ -> ]Tell me the difference between this shooting, and the Trayvon Martin shooting. Guy with a gun follows person he believes may be committing a crime. Man with a gun follows Trayvon Martin … Martin attacks the guy with a gun that is following him and gets shot. The main difference is a video.
It is not illegal to follow someone. Well, unless a Judge has ruled on such a stalking, or distance requirement.
I could see this ending the same way it did in the George Zimmerman outcome. I hope not, but I can’t recognize how this is wildly different.
Zimmerman never claimed he was trying to initiate a citizen's arrest.
Zimmerman claimed that he followed Trayvon, which is legal, but lost track of him, only for Trayvon to sneak up on him from behind and attack him.
There was only limited eyewitness testimony, no video, it was rainy and dark, and no one saw everything from beginning to end.
I think the state had enough evidence to convict Zimmerman on negligent homicide or manslaughter or something similar, but the state went for murder 2, and they never had enough evidence for that.
(05-12-2020, 11:00 AM)Olive Wrote: [ -> ]Tell me the difference between this shooting, and the Trayvon Martin shooting. Guy with a gun follows person he believes may be committing a crime. Man with a gun follows Trayvon Martin … Martin attacks the guy with a gun that is following him and gets shot. The main difference is a video.
It is not illegal to follow someone. Well, unless a Judge has ruled on such a stalking, or distance requirement.
I could see this ending the same way it did in the George Zimmerman outcome. I hope not, but I can’t recognize how this is wildly different.
Zimmerman did not engage Martin as the McMichaels did, did not repeatedly attempt to interdict him with a vehicle as the McMichaels did, there weren't two of him as there were with the McMichaels, and was on the phone with the police when Martin attacked him unlike the McMichaels.
So now videos show him going in and out of an empty house that’s a little more suspicious then reports he was just a jogger.
Who fired those first two shots in the original video? It’s clearly the third shot that hits him in the gut that’s the kill shot was that the same shotgun going off during the struggle? Was the guy in the back shooting at them while struggling for the shotgun?
I’m not so sure it’s as clear as I first thought watching he first video. If he was committing a crime, ( I can’t see any other reason he was on a vacant homestead) they where within their rights to stop and detain him. If a struggle results from a legal citizens arrest can you fault or charge either party for using force? What if Arbury has got the shotgun away from them and used it would he be guilty of murder or is it self defense?
It would be different if he stopped and waited for the authorities and then is shot but there was clearly a struggle which changes The situation instantly.
(05-12-2020, 10:49 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 10:25 AM)Byron LeftTown Wrote: [ -> ]True statement is in green.
False statement is in red.
That you are incapable of seeing how the first statement contributes to the victim's perception of the second one tells us all we need to know about your analysis.
Somebody that could have run me down from behind instead gets in front of me and tries to block my progress. No, I don't think they are trying to run me down.
(05-12-2020, 10:00 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 09:57 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]They admittedly tried to cut him off with their truck multiple times. Someone you don't know tries to run you down with their car several times and you really don't think you'd perceive it as an attack and try to run away? Then they get in front of you and get out with a [BLEEP] shotgun and you think their intentions are kosher? You guys have lost your minds.
As if ANY of what BLT and B2 said nullifies involuntary/voluntary manslaughter.
Murder 1 or 2 - not enough evidence.
Voluntary/involuntary manslaughter - yup.
Go back and you’ll see I called it involuntary, but folks around here are to insistent that only their opinions matter to actually read.
(05-12-2020, 09:57 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 09:50 AM)Byron LeftTown Wrote: [ -> ]Why do you think this is hard? Arbery had no trouble doing it.
Why didn't Arbery simply turn around and run the other way? Because the neighborhood only has one exit and there's a swamp behind many of the homes. No other escape but to try getting past the truck.
NOTE: After reading the initial police report and statements from the McMichaels, much of my speculation about the tactics of the 2 men is rendered null. They didn't saddle up with Pops in the back; initially they were both in the cab. After unsuccessfully trying to cut Arbery off, Pops got into the truck bed. It might have happened shortly before the video starts. But one thing about my scenario remains true. Pops had several clear shots at Arbery, but didn't fire until after the shotgun was fired.
They admittedly tried to cut him off with their truck multiple times. Someone you don't know tries to run you down with their car several times and you really don't think you'd perceive it as an attack and try to run away? Then they get in front of you and get out with a [BLEEP] shotgun and you think their intentions are kosher? You guys have lost your minds.
Run down? Mikesez...is that you? Geez
(05-12-2020, 12:02 PM)EricC85 Wrote: [ -> ]So now videos show him going in and out of an empty house that’s a little more suspicious then reports he was just a jogger.
Who fired those first two shots in the original video? It’s clearly the third shot that hits him in the gut that’s the kill shot was that the same shotgun going off during the struggle? Was the guy in the back shooting at them while struggling for the shotgun?
I’m not so sure it’s as clear as I first thought watching he first video. If he was committing a crime, ( I can’t see any other reason he was on a vacant homestead) they where within their rights to stop and detain him. If a struggle results from a legal citizens arrest can you fault or charge either party for using force? What if Arbury has got the shotgun away from them and used it would he be guilty of murder or is it self defense?
It would be different if he stopped and waited for the authorities and then is shot but there was clearly a struggle which changes The situation instantly.
There is a reason the autopsy report has not been made public...
(05-12-2020, 12:05 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 10:00 AM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]As if ANY of what BLT and B2 said nullifies involuntary/voluntary manslaughter.
Murder 1 or 2 - not enough evidence.
Voluntary/involuntary manslaughter - yup.
Go back and you’ll see I called it involuntary, but folks around here are to insistent that only their opinions matter to actually read.
(05-12-2020, 09:57 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]They admittedly tried to cut him off with their truck multiple times. Someone you don't know tries to run you down with their car several times and you really don't think you'd perceive it as an attack and try to run away? Then they get in front of you and get out with a [BLEEP] shotgun and you think their intentions are kosher? You guys have lost your minds.
Run down? Mikesez...is that you? Geez
(05-12-2020, 12:02 PM)EricC85 Wrote: [ -> ]So now videos show him going in and out of an empty house that’s a little more suspicious then reports he was just a jogger.
Who fired those first two shots in the original video? It’s clearly the third shot that hits him in the gut that’s the kill shot was that the same shotgun going off during the struggle? Was the guy in the back shooting at them while struggling for the shotgun?
I’m not so sure it’s as clear as I first thought watching he first video. If he was committing a crime, ( I can’t see any other reason he was on a vacant homestead) they where within their rights to stop and detain him. If a struggle results from a legal citizens arrest can you fault or charge either party for using force? What if Arbury has got the shotgun away from them and used it would he be guilty of murder or is it self defense?
It would be different if he stopped and waited for the authorities and then is shot but there was clearly a struggle which changes The situation instantly.
There is a reason the autopsy report has not been made public...
B2, sorry - I was quick to lump you in with BLT and his strawmen. Let me clarify: your weak BUT HE ESCALATED TOO argument assigns responsibility, even if it's only some, of Arbery's death to himself.
Nice to see we have people who are adamantly supportive of vigilantes chasing. down and killing people in the streets. It's ok though, now that the GBI took over for the GOB network we'll see how this turns out.
(05-12-2020, 12:03 PM)Byron LeftTown Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 10:49 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That you are incapable of seeing how the first statement contributes to the victim's perception of the second one tells us all we need to know about your analysis.
Somebody that could have run me down from behind instead gets in front of me and tries to block my progress. No, I don't think they are trying to run me down.
Lol, God help you if you ever find yourself under assault. You better damn well surrender to whoever it is making demands of you lest you be the hypocrite.
(05-12-2020, 09:02 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-11-2020, 10:38 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]I’m white
Lily, Hispanic, or Florescent though?
I identify with the sourdough cultures.
(05-12-2020, 12:02 PM)EricC85 Wrote: [ -> ]I’m not so sure it’s as clear as I first thought watching he first video. If he was committing a crime, ( I can’t see any other reason he was on a vacant homestead) they where within their rights to stop and detain him. If a struggle results from a legal citizens arrest can you fault or charge either party for using force? What if Arbury has got the shotgun away from them and used it would he be guilty of murder or is it self defense?
Here's a question: why the [BLEEP] are "citizen's arrest" laws still a thing anywhere? If someone on the street randomly stops me and tells me that they're performing a citizen's arrest, I'm walking away. If they escalate, then they're attempting to kidnap me, and I'll respond in kind with appropriate force.
(05-12-2020, 01:10 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 09:02 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Lily, Hispanic, or Florescent though?
I identify with the sourdough cultures.
(05-12-2020, 12:02 PM)EricC85 Wrote: [ -> ]I’m not so sure it’s as clear as I first thought watching he first video. If he was committing a crime, ( I can’t see any other reason he was on a vacant homestead) they where within their rights to stop and detain him. If a struggle results from a legal citizens arrest can you fault or charge either party for using force? What if Arbury has got the shotgun away from them and used it would he be guilty of murder or is it self defense?
Here's a question: why the [BLEEP] are "citizen's arrest" laws still a thing anywhere? If someone on the street randomly stops me and tells me that they're performing a citizen's arrest, I'm walking away. If they escalate, then they're attempting to kidnap me, and I'll respond in kind with appropriate force.
I mean it’s the south.....
(05-12-2020, 12:02 PM)EricC85 Wrote: [ -> ]So now videos show him going in and out of an empty house that’s a little more suspicious then reports he was just a jogger.
Who fired those first two shots in the original video? It’s clearly the third shot that hits him in the gut that’s the kill shot was that the same shotgun going off during the struggle? Was the guy in the back shooting at them while struggling for the shotgun?
I’m not so sure it’s as clear as I first thought watching he first video. If he was committing a crime, ( I can’t see any other reason he was on a vacant homestead) they where within their rights to stop and detain him. If a struggle results from a legal citizens arrest can you fault or charge either party for using force? What if Arbury has got the shotgun away from them and used it would he be guilty of murder or is it self defense?
It would be different if he stopped and waited for the authorities and then is shot but there was clearly a struggle which changes The situation instantly.
What he may or may not have been doing was irrelevant, the gunmen did not know that. They only knew that some dude was running away and went chasing after him.
Again. They DID NOT KNOW that he was in a house that day, they simply decided a running guy who looked like a burgler merited pursuit.
(05-12-2020, 01:15 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 12:02 PM)EricC85 Wrote: [ -> ]So now videos show him going in and out of an empty house that’s a little more suspicious then reports he was just a jogger.
Who fired those first two shots in the original video? It’s clearly the third shot that hits him in the gut that’s the kill shot was that the same shotgun going off during the struggle? Was the guy in the back shooting at them while struggling for the shotgun?
I’m not so sure it’s as clear as I first thought watching he first video. If he was committing a crime, ( I can’t see any other reason he was on a vacant homestead) they where within their rights to stop and detain him. If a struggle results from a legal citizens arrest can you fault or charge either party for using force? What if Arbury has got the shotgun away from them and used it would he be guilty of murder or is it self defense?
It would be different if he stopped and waited for the authorities and then is shot but there was clearly a struggle which changes The situation instantly.
What he may or may not have been doing was irrelevant, the gunmen did not know that. They only knew that some dude was running away and went chasing after him.
Again. They DID NOT KNOW that he was in a house that day, they simply decided a running guy who looked like a burgler merited pursuit.
Wrong! They knew what he did and it’s their job to stop him!
(05-12-2020, 12:15 PM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 12:05 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]Go back and you’ll see I called it involuntary, but folks around here are to insistent that only their opinions matter to actually read.
Run down? Mikesez...is that you? Geez
There is a reason the autopsy report has not been made public...
B2, sorry - I was quick to lump you in with BLT and his strawmen. Let me clarify: your weak BUT HE ESCALATED TOO argument assigns responsibility, even if it's only some, of Arbery's death to himself.
It is not necessarily me assigning blame as it is me saying there is some doubt there based on what we, the normal citizen have in front of us. It is certainly not me saying it was okay for this guy to die or for Joe and Pappa to kill someone. The courts will have their hands full trying to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
(05-12-2020, 01:46 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 12:15 PM)Gabe Wrote: [ -> ]B2, sorry - I was quick to lump you in with BLT and his strawmen. Let me clarify: your weak BUT HE ESCALATED TOO argument assigns responsibility, even if it's only some, of Arbery's death to himself.
It is not necessarily me assigning blame as it is me saying there is some doubt there based on what we, the normal citizen have in front of us. It is certainly not me saying it was okay for this guy to die or for Joe and Pappa to kill someone. The courts will have their hands full trying to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
The assailants admitted that they chased the guy because he was running and looked like some burgler they'd heard about. Everything after that admission is their fault.
(05-12-2020, 12:05 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]There is a reason the autopsy report has not been made public...
He was shot three times with the shotgun. The two fatal wounds were to the torso area. My guess is the two fatal wounds were the second and third shots fired. Not that it really matters, but those shots came during the struggle/fight that was taking place.
There is evidence that is not being talked about in the media. It appears that the person filming the incident panned to two different objects on the ground that perhaps the victim had thrown down as he ran toward the truck. What were those objects and where did they come from? Also, does anyone find it odd that he was allegedly in the vacant residence for up to 3 minutes but only 7 seconds of the footage from inside the residence is shown?
As I have said many times before in this thread, I don't condone or justify what happened in any way. My guess is that the charge of murder will probably get reduced to involuntary manslaughter if the prosecutor(s) hope for a conviction. Remember, the burden of proof falls on the prosecution to prove guilt rather than the accused proving innocence to the crime that they are charged with.
My biggest gripe is with the media and now some Georgia lawmakers trying to push the narrative that this was somehow a "hate crime" against an innocent black man out for a jog. The evidence revealed publicly doesn't seem (to me) indicate this.
(05-12-2020, 12:56 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Lol, God help you if you ever find yourself under assault. You better damn well surrender to whoever it is making demands of you lest you be the hypocrite.
You and mike sure like to put others in make-believe situations and then tell them they have to act a certain way based on a forum post you were demonstrably unable to understand.
(05-12-2020, 03:08 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2020, 12:05 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]There is a reason the autopsy report has not been made public...
He was shot three times with the shotgun. The two fatal wounds were to the torso area. My guess is the two fatal wounds were the second and third shots fired. Not that it really matters, but those shots came during the struggle/fight that was taking place.
There is evidence that is not being talked about in the media. It appears that the person filming the incident panned to two different objects on the ground that perhaps the victim had thrown down as he ran toward the truck. What were those objects and where did they come from? Also, does anyone find it odd that he was allegedly in the vacant residence for up to 3 minutes but only 7 seconds of the footage from inside the residence is shown?
As I have said many times before in this thread, I don't condone or justify what happened in any way. My guess is that the charge of murder will probably get reduced to involuntary manslaughter if the prosecutor(s) hope for a conviction. Remember, the burden of proof falls on the prosecution to prove guilt rather than the accused proving innocence to the crime that they are charged with.
My biggest gripe is with the media and now some Georgia lawmakers trying to push the narrative that this was somehow a "hate crime" against an innocent black man out for a jog. The evidence revealed publicly doesn't seem (to me) indicate this.
So what you're saying is that cops on the scene, who wanted to arrest the McMichaels boys a the time but were instructed not to by the DA, overlooked or destroyed evidence that the runner was armed or carrying stolen goods? Is that your position? Because I don't think anyone left alive at the scene had any interest in suppressing exculpatory evidence for the shooter.
Do you consider it odd that the McMichaels pair saw a black guy running down the road and so strongly believed that he was a criminal that they lit out after him to detain him? To the point of trying to block him with their vehicles (It's now "vehicles" since the 3rd guy admitted he also tried to use his truck to impede him)? To the point of pulling guns on him when he refused to stop?
It seems quite clear to me that they had no business chasing him and this whole thing is a result of that stupid decision.