• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.
  • 2021 Internet Infidels Fundraising Drive
    Greetings! Time for the annual fundraiser.Sorry for the late update, we normally start this early in October. Funds are needed to keep II and IIDB online. I was not able to get an IIDB based donations addon implemented for this year, I will make sure to have that done for next year. You can help support II in several ways, please visit the Support Us page for more info. Or just click:

    I will try to track all donations from IIDB. Many thanks to those that have already donated. The current total is $778. If everyone dontated just $5, we would easily hit our goal.

Black Jogger Gunned Down In The Street

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
I asked first.
I already answered that
I must have missed it. Would you please quote or link to that post?

Also, what do you mean by "people who are on the fence about this whole thing"? On the fence about what?

Jogging is a red herring. I think it is very likely that was introduced to gain popular opinion to force his murder into the courts, as the good ole boys had his buddies cover it up.

The jogging doesn’t matter. He committed at worst a “crime” of trespassing and was hunted down like an animal by armed wannabe vigilantes, and when they brandished a gun, he acted in self defense because he thought they aimed to kill him, which ummm probably because they were shouting and threatening him.

There is no fence to sit on here, jogging or not jogging. They committed a crime of imprisoning him and killing him.
 
Last edited:
Arbery reacted reasonably. Instinct says fight or flight. Bunch of guys, some in pickup trucks with shotguns or whatever, chasing him down, he's going into flight mode. That makes sense. And once they are both too close for being able to run without being shot and they are also somewhat surrounding him, he's cornered, in which case to survive, he's got to switch to fight mode. And that means subdue and/or take opponent's weapon, then reassess the situation, to either shoot the chasers or run again.

One thing that could have changed the game is if some of these entitled lunatics yelled, "we're making a citizen's arrest! Stop running. We are arresting you." OR if they had called the police and let the police handle it, provided they didn't lie and say Arbery was armed or dangerous, in which case, that could also end up in his death.
 

barbos

Contributor
Arbery reacted reasonably. Instinct says fight or flight. Bunch of guys, some in pickup trucks with shotguns or whatever, chasing him down, he's going into flight mode. That makes sense. And once they are both too close for being able to run without being shot and they are also somewhat surrounding him, he's cornered, in which case to survive, he's got to switch to fight mode. And that means subdue and/or take opponent's weapon, then reassess the situation, to either shoot the chasers or run again.

One thing that could have changed the game is if some of these entitled lunatics yelled, "we're making a citizen's arrest! Stop running. We are arresting you." OR if they had called the police and let the police handle it, provided they didn't lie and say Arbery was armed or dangerous, in which case, that could also end up in his death.
What about that video where Arbery started started pissing off a police officer when he decided to leave him alone? reasonable too?
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Arbery reacted reasonably. Instinct says fight or flight. Bunch of guys, some in pickup trucks with shotguns or whatever, chasing him down, he's going into flight mode. That makes sense. And once they are both too close for being able to run without being shot and they are also somewhat surrounding him, he's cornered, in which case to survive, he's got to switch to fight mode. And that means subdue and/or take opponent's weapon, then reassess the situation, to either shoot the chasers or run again.

One thing that could have changed the game is if some of these entitled lunatics yelled, "we're making a citizen's arrest! Stop running. We are arresting you." OR if they had called the police and let the police handle it, provided they didn't lie and say Arbery was armed or dangerous, in which case, that could also end up in his death.
What about that video where Arbery started started pissing off a police officer when he decided to leave him alone? reasonable too?
How in the heck is that remotely relevant?
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
What about that video where Arbery started started pissing off a police officer when he decided to leave him alone? reasonable too?

it illustrates that the the guy has displayed remarkable lack reasonableness, at least once.
And attacking a guy gun who clearly was not trying to kill you is a sure way to get killed.
Not reasonable thing to do.
Wow, your authoritarianism is showing through loud and clea.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
How in the heck is that remotely relevant?
it illustrates that the the guy has displayed remarkable lack reasonableness, at least once.
And attacking a guy gun who clearly was not trying to kill you is a sure way to get killed.
Clearly not trying to kill you? They chased him down in a truck, shouting threats at him, cornered him, and pull out a gun, and you say they "clearly" aren't trying to kill him? Apparently Arbery's only interpretation of being under threat is him being killed.

Zimmerman was allowed to kill Martin because he perceived he was in danger of his life because Martin was 'going for his gun'. Rittenhouse was allowed to kill people because they either attacked him or were moving towards him. But Arbery (black), isn't allowed to perceive a threat to his life when cornered and a gun is pulled out?
Not reasonable thing to do.
As opposed to grabbing your guns, getting in a truck to chase down a person that you did not witness committing a felony, yelling threats at them, then pulling out a gun?

We are supposed to concentrate on how Arbrary made bad choices?

And again, we are supposed to accept the claim of self-defense of the guy holding a gun, but not the guy who hasn't committed any crime (in fact surrounded by people are actively committing a crime in his detainment) and has a gun brandished at him?
 

Gospel

Aethiopian
clearly was not trying to kill you

What made that clear? Was it the part where he was being chased by civilians he didn't know? Was it the part where one of the said civilians brandished a shotgun as he rounded one of their cars that cut him off? What part made that clear to you?
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Some on jury looking to acquit? Jury ask to see video and listen to 911 call. That sounds like they are trying to justify the shooting in their minds.

The 911 call tells them what? The judge already signaled strongly they need to convict on false imprisonment, so why are they asking for the 911 call other than to see into what the shooter and dad were thinking? Then the video, they could be trying to draw a line on the shooter's self-defense.

My ignorant, baseless take, convict or hang on false imprisonment, hang on murder. Hope I'm wrong. What happened was so screwed up, Georgia changed the law!
 

TomC

Veteran Member
clearly was not trying to kill you

What made that clear? Was it the part where he was being chased by civilians he didn't know? Was it the part where one of the said civilians brandished a shotgun as he rounded one of their cars that cut him off? What part made that clear to you?
Pretty much this.

I've been left with the impression that Arbery was up to no good at the time. "Jogging"? Please.

But that doesn't change the fact that his killers committed murder. They chased him, boxed him in, then shot him.

Then, to make it all worse, their friends in the "justice" business tried to cover it all up. They deserve serious prison time. But so does, maybe more so, their friend in the prosecution office. Arbery's murderers committed a violent crime in the heat of the moment. The prosecutor who waved it away, and tried to cover it up, also deserves serious prison time.

I don't hear much about her. Anybody know what's happening on that front?
Tom
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
clearly was not trying to kill you

What made that clear? Was it the part where he was being chased by civilians he didn't know? Was it the part where one of the said civilians brandished a shotgun as he rounded one of their cars that cut him off? What part made that clear to you?
Pretty much this.

I've been left with the impression that Arbery was up to no good at the time. "Jogging"? Please.
Just because he isn't jogging doesn't mean he wasn't out walking. He went on a construction site. OMFG! Who hasn't?! There is no evidence he ever stole a thing in the neighborhood that I'm aware of. And there appears to be no evidence anything was ever stolen on that site in particular.
But that doesn't change the fact that his killers committed murder. They chased him, boxed him in, then shot him.

Then, to make it all worse, their friends in the "justice" business tried to cover it all up. They deserve serious prison time. But so does, maybe more so, their friend in the prosecution office. Arbery's murderers committed a violent crime in the heat of the moment. The prosecutor who waved it away, and tried to cover it up, also deserves serious prison time.

I don't hear much about her. Anybody know what's happening on that front?
Tom
That could depend on the jury's findings in this case. I'm not hopeful.

People that have guns get a lot of leeway in these cases.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
How in the heck is that remotely relevant?
it illustrates that the the guy has displayed remarkable lack reasonableness, at least once.
And attacking a guy gun who clearly was not trying to kill you is a sure way to get killed.
Not reasonable thing to do.

What about that 1 unreasonable thing you did in your life? Should I put you on ignore for that?
He made the decision to pull Tretiak from net in the USSR v USA game in 1980.
 

Trausti

Contributor
I've been left with the impression that Arbery was up to no good at the time. "Jogging"? Please.

But that doesn't change the fact that his killers committed murder. They chased him, boxed him in, then shot him.
One can think that Arbery was up to no good and also that these guys were criminally stupid.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Why on earth does it matter if he was wearing socks?

The lack of socks strongly suggests he was not jogging. Jogging is going to cause rubbing of your feet against your footgear--a lack of socks makes blisters far more likely.

Head down to your local REI and check out the sock department. Not only do you find durable socks, but you also find thin, slippery liner socks. That's because when we really want blister protection we wear two pairs.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
The jury can find however they want. The law says that the pa and son were guilty of illegally trying to arrest this guy. They had no right to do so. They witnessed no crime. While committing their crime, the guy is shot. Saying it is self defense really requires ending these ridiculous SYG laws, as it effectively says people without guns have no right to self-defense. And if they killed him in "self-defense", they might be lenient on the illegal arrest issue.

They are no less guilty than illegally detaining this man. And in committing that crime, they killed the person they were illegally detaining. But they are white... he is black.

And that is why we have that whole #BLM thing.

This has nothing to do with SYG.
 

Toni

Contributor
Why on earth does it matter if he was wearing socks?

The lack of socks strongly suggests he was not jogging. Jogging is going to cause rubbing of your feet against your footgear--a lack of socks makes blisters far more likely.

Head down to your local REI and check out the sock department. Not only do you find durable socks, but you also find thin, slippery liner socks. That's because when we really want blister protection we wear two pairs.
Yes, yes, yes: I know that most runners wear socks. But to tell the truth, I see a lot of people running who are not wearing socks that are apparent. I'm talking apparent serious runners, as in groups of people running.

And besides: So what if he was jogging or not jogging? Or wearing khaki shorts? I mean, how nefarious! Khaki shorts! No socks!
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Jogging is a red herring. I think it is very likely that was introduced to gain popular opinion to force his murder into the courts, as the good ole boys had his buddies cover it up.

The jogging doesn’t matter. He committed at worst a “crime” of trespassing and was hunted down like an animal by armed wannabe vigilantes, and when they brandished a gun, he acted in self defense because he thought they aimed to kill him, which ummm probably because they were shouting and threatening him.

There is no fence to sit on here, jogging or not jogging. They committed a crime of imprisoning him and killing him.

Exactly. Perhaps he was just having a look around (my job used to occasionally take me onto construction sites. I would often look around just out of curiosity), perhaps he was looking for stuff to steal. That doesn't change what happened afterwards--their behavior looked like a lynching, he tried to escape. Thus they provoked it, no self defense.
 

Gospel

Aethiopian
The verdicts just came in. Son guilty on all charges. Father and Neighbor guilty on most charges, including most of the murder charges. Justice at last. I'm proud to be living in Georgia today.

Congrats America, you got what we ordered right! You Just need to work on the other hundreds of thousands you get wrong every day and you might surpass Mcdonald's.

Disclaimer: I am proud to be a Jamerican.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
The verdicts just came in. Son guilty on all charges. Father and Neighbor guilty on most charges, including most of the murder charges. Justice at last. I'm proud to be living in Georgia today.
Well, that is a swing a miss for me... and I'm happy to be wrong. This is justice and hopefully stops some people from playing vigilante.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Why on earth does it matter if he was wearing socks?

The lack of socks strongly suggests he was not jogging. Jogging is going to cause rubbing of your feet against your footgear--a lack of socks makes blisters far more likely.

Head down to your local REI and check out the sock department. Not only do you find durable socks, but you also find thin, slippery liner socks. That's because when we really want blister protection we wear two pairs.
Yes, yes, yes: I know that most runners wear socks. But to tell the truth, I see a lot of people running who are not wearing socks that are apparent. I'm talking apparent serious runners, as in groups of people running.

And besides: So what if he was jogging or not jogging? Or wearing khaki shorts? I mean, how nefarious! Khaki shorts! No socks!
There are socks that are very low profile. Light, breathable, and very on-topic! This matters! Almost as much as the convictions. Blisters on my two runs without socks. That is anecdotal and something you can take to the bank. :D
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
I've been left with the impression that Arbery was up to no good at the time. "Jogging"? Please.

But that doesn't change the fact that his killers committed murder. They chased him, boxed him in, then shot him.
One can think that Arbery was up to no good and also that these guys were criminally stupid.
What makes anyone think Arbery was up to no good? Because he was black and not wearing socks???

The defense tried to portray Arbery as a savage. To me, the savages were the ones that chased him down in pickup trucks with guns and pumped three shotgun shells into Arbery's chest.
 

Artemus

Veteran Member
I've been left with the impression that Arbery was up to no good at the time. "Jogging"? Please.

But that doesn't change the fact that his killers committed murder. They chased him, boxed him in, then shot him.
One can think that Arbery was up to no good and also that these guys were criminally stupid.
What makes anyone think Arbery was up to no good? Because he was black and not wearing socks???

The defense tried to portray Arbery as a savage. To me, the savages were the ones that chased him down in pickup trucks with guns and pumped three shotgun shells into Arbery's chest.

He was trespassing at a construction site. That clearly warrants deadly force. /s
 

Gospel

Aethiopian
I'd think anyone is up to no good if they enter a property under construction on my street and I've never seen them before. But I damn sure wouldn't chase them down in my car then hop out and shoot them. There is a difference between thinking someone is up to no good and taking action on those thoughts. Guess nobody ever taught daddy & son the distinction.
 

blastula

Contributor
For some reason, Arbery loved visiting that lot but not taking anything. Maybe he did this at other lots too, and it wasn't caught on camera. He didn't have permission to be there, and should have known he shouldn't be there, even if not stealing. At least one of the videos does show him jogging away from the site. He was very fit, probably did run. I run in shorts like that sometimes too. Not sure if he had socks that day. I don't think there was any testimony about it other than a photo of him in his Nikes, where you can't see socks, but they could have been low profile. And his house was almost 2 miles away from the lot, so walking sockless that far would have been just as much of a problem for him, if at all, as jogging like that.

Even if they did have the right to citizen arrest him, they didn't have right to use the excessive force that they used. I think the jury got the VERY MANY charges all correct. Malice murder for TM only, felony murder for the other two. I do have some sympathy for Bryan, he didn't know they would pull a gun on Arbery, but he did commit the felonies that led to it.

Not just the jurors, but the judge and all the attorneys (except maybe Bryan's) performed very well in this trial, much better than in another recent one.
 
Last edited:

Gospel

Aethiopian
They're not supposed to celebrate in the courtroom but I felt exactly how that brotha in the background felt when he heard the first guilty verdict. He was removed from the courtroom but trust me, that's like the final seconds in a game where your team is so far ahead there is no use staying in the stadium. Hopefully, he also managed to beat the traffic out of the parking lot. Just sayin.
 

TomC

Veteran Member
For some reason, Arbery loved visiting that lot but not taking anything.
That's a whole new unsupported assertion.

Frankly, I don't care. The McMichaels got their day in court, were convicted, and I've stopped caring about that part.

What I care about now is the prosecutor who swept this all under the rug. I want to see her explain her behavior, in a public court.
And if it's what it looks like from here, go to prison. Sorry for her "luck" if she winds up in a cell with a few of the criminals she put away over the years.
Tom
 

blastula

Contributor
Then, to make it all worse, their friends in the "justice" business tried to cover it all up. They deserve serious prison time. But so does, maybe more so, their friend in the prosecution office. Arbery's murderers committed a violent crime in the heat of the moment. The prosecutor who waved it away, and tried to cover it up, also deserves serious prison time.

I don't hear much about her. Anybody know what's happening on that front?

 

TomC

Veteran Member
Then, to make it all worse, their friends in the "justice" business tried to cover it all up. They deserve serious prison time. But so does, maybe more so, their friend in the prosecution office. Arbery's murderers committed a violent crime in the heat of the moment. The prosecutor who waved it away, and tried to cover it up, also deserves serious prison time.

I don't hear much about her. Anybody know what's happening on that front?

Well, good.
It's a start anyway.
Tom
 

southernhybrid

Contributor
They're not supposed to celebrate in the courtroom but I felt exactly how that brotha in the background felt when he heard the first guilty verdict. He was removed from the courtroom but trust me, that's like the final seconds in a game where your team is so far ahead there is no use staying in the stadium. Hopefully, he also managed to beat the traffic out of the parking lot. Just sayin.
I get it. When I heard the verdict, I was sitting on my sofa and I let out a big cheer. I've been texting friends and even ran to my neighbor's home to tell her the verdict. Of course, the Arbery family will always miss their loved one, but at least they can feel as if the jury came to the right conclusion. I can't imagine what it would be like have one's son murdered and then have the murderer get off! Anyway. I'm glad it's over and the family can move on from here. I'm glad that they have such a fantastic support system.

I also told one of my closest Black friends this morning, prior to hearing the verdict, that she shouldn't negatively judge the nearly all White jury because most of us White folks in Georgia aren't racist assholes who judge everyone based on skin color or culture. She understood that prejudice can be an issue for people regardless of race. Sometimes people judge others based on one negative experience. Shouldn't be that way! Nobody wants to be judged based on their skin shade, culture, gender, etc. But, I digress. :)
 

Toni

Contributor
Jogging is a red herring. I think it is very likely that was introduced to gain popular opinion to force his murder into the courts, as the good ole boys had his buddies cover it up.

The jogging doesn’t matter. He committed at worst a “crime” of trespassing and was hunted down like an animal by armed wannabe vigilantes, and when they brandished a gun, he acted in self defense because he thought they aimed to kill him, which ummm probably because they were shouting and threatening him.

There is no fence to sit on here, jogging or not jogging. They committed a crime of imprisoning him and killing him.

Exactly. Perhaps he was just having a look around (my job used to occasionally take me onto construction sites. I would often look around just out of curiosity), perhaps he was looking for stuff to steal. That doesn't change what happened afterwards--their behavior looked like a lynching, he tried to escape. Thus they provoked it, no self defense.
Lots of people stop and look at construction sites. The owner of the property knew that lots of people stopped at his construction site.
 

J842P

Veteran Member
I asked first.
I already answered that
I must have missed it. Would you please quote or link to that post?

Also, what do you mean by "people who are on the fence about this whole thing"? On the fence about what?

Jogging is a red herring. I think it is very likely that was introduced to gain popular opinion to force his murder into the courts, as the good ole boys had his buddies cover it up.

The jogging doesn’t matter. He committed at worst a “crime” of trespassing and was hunted down like an animal by armed wannabe vigilantes, and when they brandished a gun, he acted in self defense because he thought they aimed to kill him, which ummm probably because they were shouting and threatening him.

There is no fence to sit on here, jogging or not jogging. They committed a crime of imprisoning him and killing him.
Right. Even if you postulate for the sake of argument that he was responsible for the burglaries from before, that still does not justify the attempted citizen's arrest, which is clearly aggravated assault in this case. At that point, felony murder is pretty much open and shut.
 
Jogging is a red herring. I think it is very likely that was introduced to gain popular opinion to force his murder into the courts, as the good ole boys had his buddies cover it up.

The jogging doesn’t matter. He committed at worst a “crime” of trespassing and was hunted down like an animal by armed wannabe vigilantes, and when they brandished a gun, he acted in self defense because he thought they aimed to kill him, which ummm probably because they were shouting and threatening him.

There is no fence to sit on here, jogging or not jogging. They committed a crime of imprisoning him and killing him.

Exactly. Perhaps he was just having a look around (my job used to occasionally take me onto construction sites. I would often look around just out of curiosity), perhaps he was looking for stuff to steal. That doesn't change what happened afterwards--their behavior looked like a lynching, he tried to escape. Thus they provoked it, no self defense.
Lots of people stop and look at construction sites. The owner of the property knew that lots of people stopped at his construction site.
I am pretty sure I mentioned this, too, like 20 pages or whatever ago...When I built my house a lot of white people in the neighborhood stopped by, regularly, unannounced, etc etc. One guy who was unemployed liked to stop by and drink beer with some of the guys. Other people went through the property often (technically trespassing) to look at the pond or go fishing.
 

Toni

Contributor
Jogging is a red herring. I think it is very likely that was introduced to gain popular opinion to force his murder into the courts, as the good ole boys had his buddies cover it up.

The jogging doesn’t matter. He committed at worst a “crime” of trespassing and was hunted down like an animal by armed wannabe vigilantes, and when they brandished a gun, he acted in self defense because he thought they aimed to kill him, which ummm probably because they were shouting and threatening him.

There is no fence to sit on here, jogging or not jogging. They committed a crime of imprisoning him and killing him.

Exactly. Perhaps he was just having a look around (my job used to occasionally take me onto construction sites. I would often look around just out of curiosity), perhaps he was looking for stuff to steal. That doesn't change what happened afterwards--their behavior looked like a lynching, he tried to escape. Thus they provoked it, no self defense.
Lots of people stop and look at construction sites. The owner of the property knew that lots of people stopped at his construction site.
I am pretty sure I mentioned this, too, like 20 pages or whatever ago...When I built my house a lot of white people in the neighborhood stopped by, regularly, unannounced, etc etc. One guy who was unemployed liked to stop by and drink beer with some of the guys. Other people went through the property often (technically trespassing) to look at the pond or go fishing.
Yep. I remember when I was a kid, they built a house on an empty lot down the block from me. A number of the neighborhood men, including my dad, used to stop by and check on the progress, checking to see if the house was 'up to their standards' which was funny as it was an extremely modest neighborhood......Dad didn't wear socks in the summer, except when he went to work or otherwise had to dress up. I'm like him: hot footed. I rarely wear socks unless it's really, really, really cold or sometimes if I'm hiking I do, if I worry about picking up ticks. Socks don't protect against ticks, but they make it easier to spot them, sometimes....
 

lpetrich

Contributor
What we know about jury deliberations in the Ahmaud Arbery killing trial - CNN
Nine White women, two White men and one Black man served on the jury, with two White women and one White man serving as jury alternates, according to a CNN analysis of juror data. Having only one Black juror was a key complaint from prosecutors and Arbery's family, as Glynn County's population is about 69% White and 26% Black, according to 2019 data from the US Census Bureau. Arbery was Black and the defendants are White.

...
Defense attorneys also took issue with there being fewer older White men without college degrees in the juror pool, saying the demographic was underrepresented.
Welcome to the club.

Ahmaud Arbery case: The charges each defendant was convicted of

Defendants: Travis McMichael, Greg McMichael, William “Roddie” Bryan
  1. Malice murder: TMM
  2. Felony murder: TMM, GMM
  3. Felony murder: TMM, GMM, WRB
  4. Felony murder: TMM, GMM, WRB
  5. Felony murder: TMM, GMM, WRB
  6. Aggravated assault: TMM, GMM
  7. Aggravated assault: TMM, GMM, WRB
  8. False imprisonment: TMM, GMM, WRB
  9. Criminal attempt to commit a felony: TMM, GMM, WRB
TMM: 9, GMM: 8, WRB: 6
What are malice murder and felony murder?

Malice Murder: An intentional murder that is willful and premeditated.

Felony Murder: A killing that occurs during the commission or attempted commission of a felony. Intent is not necessary. In this case, the underlying felonies were aggravated assault, false imprisonment and criminal attempt to commit a felony.
[/list]
 

Toni

Contributor
The two really, really sad things about this case: A young man was killed in a horrible manner, for basically..being a black man. That's a terrible, terrible tragedy for all who knew and loved him and for all of us who knew of him.

The other really, really sad thing: The men who killed Aubrey honestly felt they were doing the right thing, that they were justified and had a reason and a duty to do what they did.

Both are terrible indictments on the current state of affairs in the US.
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
There are socks that are very low profile. Light, breathable, and very on-topic! This matters! Almost as much as the convictions. Blisters on my two runs without socks. That is anecdotal and something you can take to the bank. :D
I can't believe police and prosecutors and the jury all overlooked this crucial piece of evidence that would surely, surely have resulted in vastly different verdicts. smh
 

laughing dog

Contributor
The two really, really sad things about this case: A young man was killed in a horrible manner, for basically..being a black man. That's a terrible, terrible tragedy for all who knew and loved him and for all of us who knew of him.

The other really, really sad thing: The men who killed Aubrey honestly felt they were doing the right thing, that they were justified and had a reason and a duty to do what they did.

Both are terrible indictments on the current state of affairs in the US.
You forgot another sad thing about this case - the number of people who felt those killers were justified.
 

barbos

Contributor
clearly was not trying to kill you

What made that clear? Was it the part where he was being chased by civilians he didn't know? Was it the part where one of the said civilians brandished a shotgun as he rounded one of their cars that cut him off? What part made that clear to you?
The part where they did not shoot him immediately and told him to stop instead.
But that doesn't change the fact that his killers committed murder. They chased him, boxed him in, then shot him.
You omitted a part where Arbery attacked a guy with a shotgun.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
clearly was not trying to kill you

What made that clear? Was it the part where he was being chased by civilians he didn't know? Was it the part where one of the said civilians brandished a shotgun as he rounded one of their cars that cut him off? What part made that clear to you?
The part where they did not shoot him immediately and told him to stop instead.
But that doesn't change the fact that his killers committed murder. They chased him, boxed him in, then shot him.
You omitted a part where Arbery attacked a guy with a shotgun.
You missed the part where three armed guys in trucks attacked Arbery first.
 
Top Bottom