(05-12-2020, 03:32 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote:

(05-12-2020, 03:08 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: 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.

I agree with FSG on this one, JIB. If the dude filming was part of the chasing posse, maybe he thought he saw something get thrown down when in actuality, nothing was. My guess, however, is one of two things happened:

1. He lost his grip because he was driving and filming simultaneously (irresponsible). If you've got a wallet phone case, this is definitely possible. 

2. He thought Arbery was about to get mowed down as soon as the truck comes into view and decided to avoid that critical piece of cinematography

---