Ahmaud Arbery

[wufan]

Was the victim dressed in jogging attire?

He was not, allegedly. I have heard it argued that he was, but what is jogging attire, etc. consider it suspect, but not demonstrated. He wasn’t jogging for at least part of the interaction. He was in a full on sprint. Maybe it was because he was fleeing a crime scene. Maybe it’s because a couple of rednecks in a truck were chasing him down.

[wufan]

In what world is waiting in a truck with a gun while he was on his jogging route not setting a trap? That's what it was. Why you are picking that particular syntax to be picking at.

So this isn’t factually correct. They chased him. It was an attempt to make a citizens arrest, per their statement. When they stopped, Arbery rushed them (no motive implied).

He was not on his jogging route. He was 10 miles from home wearing cargo shorts and not running shoes. This was his route of choice on several previous occasions after dark. Per video evidence, he frequently entered the house (under construction (no motive implied).

There is no evidence of racism by the hillbillies at this time. If the same had happened to a white, Chinese, or Mexican man, would it make the scenario any better? If this is pervasive against black people, name 12 similar instances in the last year and I will be on your side.

[wufan]

The jogger was doing a walk-thru at a construction site. Did they see him? Probably, Was he trespassing? Well, sure, but that does not mean he was casing the joint.

No it doesn’t. There is now evidence, however, that he was casing the property. Multiple night time surveillance videos have come out showing him entering and leaving the property. We was not jogging to or away from the home located 10 miles from his house on the videos.

Additional evidence of him committing a felony will have to come out (if he did commit a felony) or these boys in the pickup will be going to prison. The guy filming the video isn’t off the hook either, although I’m not sure what his role was in this.

[wufan]

It nullifies any legality, which you stated may have been the case here. So was it legal or a trap? Then we can discuss/debate further, like mature adults, without getting hysterical.

We can discuss morality in some other thread about your President, or even the prior one. Fair?

The legality of the pursuit, stop, trap, or what-have-you is the crux of the defense. There is not enough currently known to say it was a legal stop, however circumstantial evidence has been coming out quickly that does support that it “might” have been.

[pinstripers]

Trump needs to stay out of this, just as Obama should have stayed out of the Travon matter

[ShockingButTrue]

circumstantial evidence has been coming out quickly that does support that it “might” have been.

That's my point.

There's video evidence of a black man who appears to be the same person, casing the same place at night, coupled with property being stolen over recent time in the area. So yes, it "might" have been legal. That's more plausible than it was a couple dudes out looking for a black man to kill in the middle of the street in the middle of the afternoon, because hey, that type of thing is pervasive in this country. Not implying you believe that by the way. Just putting it out there to counter what's been hysterically implied by others, not necessarily on this board.

[ShockTalk]

So this isn’t factually correct. They chased him. It was an attempt to make a citizens arrest, per their statement. When they stopped, Arbery rushed them (no motive implied).

He was not on his jogging route. He was 10 miles from home wearing cargo shorts and not running shoes. This was his route of choice on several previous occasions after dark. Per video evidence, he frequently entered the house (under construction (no motive implied).

There is no evidence of racism by the hillbillies at this time. If the same had happened to a white, Chinese, or Mexican man, would it make the scenario any better? If this is pervasive against black people, name 12 similar instances in the last year and I will be on your side.

What video did you see. I saw the one that is totally different than you described. There is a car taking a video a black man jogging/running (it was not a full out run, I thought he was jogging) down a street with a curve in it. When the car gets beyond the curve the black man is still quite away from a parked pickup truck that had a white man standing in the truck bed with a gun, another white man, with a gun, standing just outside the truck in front of the driver side opened door. The jogger was running straight, more to the drivers side of the truck, then as he got closer, starting veering to the passager side and was passing the truck on that side. As the jogger was changing direction, the man standing on the road on the driver's side, goes around the front of the truck. During the scuffle, both men end up back on the driver's side and it appeared the jogger was trying to hold the gun mussel down toward the road. There is a least one picture I've seen that shows jogger running away with his back to the confronting man and the jogger appears to be falling down. See link below.

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ydm-story.html

[wufan]

I saw the same video, but there is additional video of him sprinting away from the house after someone else comes out and confronts him while on the phone with police.

Arbery turns towards the men when the car is parked and tries to get the gun. He could have run away from the vehicle and street and towards one of his neighbors on his jogging route. If these men are making an illegal stop, that is Arbery defending himself from his attackers. If it is a legal stop, then that is the McMurries using “stand your ground”.

The picture you linked is of Arbery after he had been fatally shot (as noted in the article). Not Arbery being shot in the back as he runs away.

[wufan]

Other circumstantial facts:

McMurray had his gun stolen from his vehicle in January.

McMurray has previously assisted in the prosecution of Avery for an unrelated crime.

The “videographer” is not associated with the McMurries, but has been fired over the incident and is in hiding while being threatened by some and being investigated by the police for murder. This despite the fact that he volunteered the video to police.

[ShockingButTrue]

There's also video of "what appears" to be (probably is) Arbrey trespassing on the same property during the am hours from several day, or weeks, prior to this incident. This is coupled with recent documentation of property theft from that property, and nearby property, that I'm pretty sure the Father and Son probably already had knowledge of, and took into account when confronting "the jogger" who was out "jogging" over 10 miles from his place of residence.

Could it be he wasn't jogging but was "running" because he saw the neighbor across the street on his cell phone, which there is video of (Arbrey walking out and the neighbor on his cell phone)?

[ShockingButTrue]

Other circumstantial facts:

McMurray had his gun stolen from his vehicle in January.

McMurray has previously assisted in the prosecution of Avery for an unrelated crime.

The “videographer” is not associated with the McMurries, but has been fired over the incident and is in hiding while being threatened by some and being investigated by the police for murder. This despite the fact that he volunteered the video to police.

From what I understand, believe it or not, he released the video to "help" the Father and Son because it's shows Avery throwing punches in relation to what they all considered a legal citizens arrest based on "prior evidence." In other words, Avery attacked and that is why he got shot. Don't think the video helped their case much at all.

[wufan]

From what I understand, believe it or not, he released the video to "help" the Father and Son because it's shows Avery throwing punches in relation to what they all considered a legal citizens arrest based on "prior evidence." In other words, Avery attacked and that is why he got shot. Don't think the video helped their case much at all.

Other facts:

Its McMichael not McMurray. My bad!

[pinstripers]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjfvkSlXwn8&fbclid=IwAR0eFo9LvTj0_bDsk0mh-WWYio7r49VBMGTYZbDpgTNV-nFHV8S7jeXpVc0

long, but worth the watch

[ShockingButTrue]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjfv...nFHV8S7jeXpVc0

long, but worth the watch

This guy makes some rational common-sense points, and asks the right questions.

His contention about people rushing to judgement, concerning racism, is very valid. It causes division to call someone a racist just because they "look" like one, or have a different view than they might. Exhibit A is what the prior administration did to the current President: they basically framed him for no other reason than that they were morally superior. During an election no less. Now That's the kind of thinking that flouts the rule of law.

[ShockTalk]

From what I understand, believe it or not, he released the video to "help" the Father and Son because it's shows Avery throwing punches in relation to what they all considered a legal citizens arrest based on "prior evidence." In other words, Avery attacked and that is why he got shot. Don't think the video helped their case much at all.

It didn't help because it showed Avery was not the attacker. While running/jogging, he had moved over to go around the truck on the opposite side from where the son was standing to avoid a confrontation. The son then went around the front of the truck with his gun and that's where the scuffle started. No hold your ground, no self defense.

By the way, what was the evidence they had that allowed them to make a "citizen's arrest"? Was he holding something he stole? Did any of the videos show him taking something from the building site?

I'm not saying that Avery didn't have ill intent, but if there was no proof, then, there was no crime or reason to make a citizen's arrest. The McMichaels were the aggressors.