Black Jogger Gunned Down In The Street

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

FFS.

Let's review:
"Arbery wasn't a child. And if he knew much about the neighborhood he'd have known that it was on edge because of crime. Sorry, I'm confident he was planning a crime."

The sentences prior to "I'm confident he was planning a crime," do not appear to provide confidence for likelihood he was committing a crime. The prior sentences also do not speak to much about what he did after he was being chased. In fact, they don't seem to bring any kind of value to the discussion at all. I mean, maybe he knew some of the people had things stolen and being a competent adult, he might conclude some of the people could possibly be "on edge," but this does absolutely nothing to change the situation.

 

[atrib]

Of course you're confident Arbery was planning a crime.

I wonder why that is.

I've explained why, in this thread. Including the post you quoted.

I understand that you're trying to make this about racism. But it's not, at least not to me. The McMichaels I'm not so sure, probably it was a big part of their motivations. I'm also confident that their behavior would have been at least a little different had a white guy done whatever Arbery did. The guy probably wouldn't have wound up dead. Who knows, maybe he would have.
Tom

I kind of missed that part where about what made you certain that Arbrey wasn't planning a crime. Was it the part about him not being a child? The part about him maybe not being familiar enough with the neighborhood to realize the neighborhood was 'on edge because of crime?' I don't remember reading that part in any news accounts.

Are you saying that Arbery was a threat because he wasn't a child? Or because he wasn't that familiar with that neighborhood? Are you saying that adults cannot walk or jog through neighborhoods where they don't live?

Dang, that's a remarkable army of strawmen.

I seriously resent all the vague accusations you throw at me. In this case, it's racism. But you never quite say why you think I'm a racist.
Tom

How can it be a strawman? Toni used your own words.

You just used the word "strawman". If I use the word to describe this post I'm just using your own words.
Amirite?
Tom

Your brilliance is an inspiration to us all.
Gives me great understanding into the IIDB community.
Tom

Why not just answer the question? I don't remember you explaining how you knew Arbery was planning a crime either; just you asserting that he was.

 

[TomC]

Let's review:

But it doesn't matter to me. What he did is on him. What they did is on them.

Nothing here about race.
Or gender.
Or sex.
Or orientation.
Or ethnicity.
Or economic ideology.
Or religion.

It's all about behaviour.

What I have been told about the behavior, which is all I have to go on. Arbery's behavior didn't justify what the McMichaels did. I also said that.
Somehow, I'm still the racist.
Tom

 

[Gospel]

Felony murder charges flew all over the place and people are still blaming the dead guy.

 

[Toni]

Let's review:

But it doesn't matter to me. What he did is on him. What they did is on them.

Nothing here about race.
Or gender.
Or sex.
Or orientation.
Or ethnicity.
Or economic ideology.
Or religion.

It's all about behaviour.

What I have been told about the behavior, which is all I have to go on. Arbery's behavior didn't justify what the McMichaels did. I also said that.
Somehow, I'm still the racist.
Tom

So what was it about Arbery’s behavior that made you think he was planning a crime?

 

[Jarhyn]

Just wanted to clarify because there is no sarcasm font: My statement was definitely sarcastic.

Toni doesn't know that ThErE iS a SaRcaSM fOnT.

That's more "sarcastic bad faith" rather than pure sarcasm.

Sorry about the joke, here's some money for it's family.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Let's review:

But it doesn't matter to me. What he did is on him. What they did is on them.

Nothing here about race.
Or gender.
Or sex.
Or orientation.
Or ethnicity.
Or economic ideology.
Or religion.

It's all about behaviour.

What I have been told about the behavior, which is all I have to go on. Arbery's behavior didn't justify what the McMichaels did. I also said that.
Somehow, I'm still the racist.
Tom

What in the actual fuck are you talking about?! Nothing in here about you be a racist, just illogically making unsupported claims. Explain why you know for sure he was committing crimes.

 

[TomC]

almost certainly meant you were where you weren't supposed to be.

Arbery wasn't a child. And if he knew much about the neighborhood he'd have known that it was on edge because of crime. Sorry, I'm confident he was planning a crime. But it doesn't matter to me. What he did is on him. What they did is on them.

What makes this debacle particularly pathetic is that the McMichaels could probably have gotten off if things had been handled differently from the get go. With his connections and support from a few neighbors, a proficient lawyer could probably have cut a deal for some minor crime like negligence or something. A couple years probation, can't possess a firearm while on probation, something like that. No jail time at all.
Heck, some lawyer would probably have done it for cheap to get in good with law enforcement officials. Who knows.
Tom

Of course you're confident Arbery was planning a crime.

I wonder why that is.

And of course, a competent lawyer could have convinced the jury that it was perfectly fine or maybe just a tiny bit bad to chase down a man with vehicles and point guns at him and shoot him in the streets because that was no kind of threat to anyone except the man who was killed and what does he matter? He was obviously planning a crime because.....I dunno. Why would we know that? Is there something in his appearance that made him look like he was planning a crime? What could that possibly be?

Nothing in here about you be a racist,

See if you can find the accusations of racism in @Toni post. #1343, IIRC. I quoted it.

Tom

 

[atrib]

almost certainly meant you were where you weren't supposed to be.

Arbery wasn't a child. And if he knew much about the neighborhood he'd have known that it was on edge because of crime. Sorry, I'm confident he was planning a crime. But it doesn't matter to me. What he did is on him. What they did is on them.

What makes this debacle particularly pathetic is that the McMichaels could probably have gotten off if things had been handled differently from the get go. With his connections and support from a few neighbors, a proficient lawyer could probably have cut a deal for some minor crime like negligence or something. A couple years probation, can't possess a firearm while on probation, something like that. No jail time at all.
Heck, some lawyer would probably have done it for cheap to get in good with law enforcement officials. Who knows.
Tom

Of course you're confident Arbery was planning a crime.

I wonder why that is.

And of course, a competent lawyer could have convinced the jury that it was perfectly fine or maybe just a tiny bit bad to chase down a man with vehicles and point guns at him and shoot him in the streets because that was no kind of threat to anyone except the man who was killed and what does he matter? He was obviously planning a crime because.....I dunno. Why would we know that? Is there something in his appearance that made him look like he was planning a crime? What could that possibly be?

Nothing in here about you be a racist,

See if you can find the accusations of racism in @Toni post. #1343, IIRC. I quoted it.

Tom

I can't find any accusations of racism in Toni's post. I see her asking questions, questions you are unwilling to answer. Why not answer them and clear it all up?

Why won't you explain why you are sure that Arbery was planning a crime instead of going down these rabbit holes?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

None of the killers bothered to call the police during the pursuit, which tells is that they intended to handle the situation with their guns. That is what the facts show, that is what the prosecution demonstrated through the testimony (much of which came from the killers's own statements to the police), and that is what the jury decided. Before you make any more stupid assertions trying to shift the blame to the victim, you should take the time to at least watch the prosecution's closing arguments to understand what happened that day.

Disagree here--I think they were planning a beating, not a murder.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

1. They committed a felony by brandishing a firearm when they were not under threat which would have made the citizens arrest null and void if they could have made one

Trying to hit him with the truck is worse than brandishing the firearm.

Brandishing a firearm after trying to hit him with a truck is worse than trying to hit him with a truck. The keyword is escalation, which is the source of Arbery's desperation.

Brandishing is a threat of deadly force, trying to hit him with the truck is actual deadly force. I consider the latter more serious.

 

[Swammerdami]

I didn't watch this trial or Kyle's; and I didn't spend time on learning details. Is televising such cases this Amerika's latest substitute for the lions -vs- Christians spectacles of Rome? But two things occur to me:

(1) The probability is about 99.8% that, in similar situation, a white man would NOT have been suspected and attacked the way Arbery was. Anyone who doubts this fact is deluded.

(2) The alleged non-crime was that Arbery "cased out" an unguarded house under construction. Was there anything worth stealing there? Did the murderers think Arbery was hoping to find a hammer or bag of nails a worker had left behind? Is it not likelier that Arbery was just intrigued to see how the work progressed?

 

[Toni]

None of the killers bothered to call the police during the pursuit, which tells is that they intended to handle the situation with their guns. That is what the facts show, that is what the prosecution demonstrated through the testimony (much of which came from the killers's own statements to the police), and that is what the jury decided. Before you make any more stupid assertions trying to shift the blame to the victim, you should take the time to at least watch the prosecution's closing arguments to understand what happened that day.

Disagree here--I think they were planning a beating, not a murder.

Beatings can definitely result in death. You don't need a gun to kill someone. Or a big ass truck, either. They just happened to have both, as well as advantages in numbers and not inconsiderable advantage in weight. There is a reason that they chased Arbery down in trucks, that they carried loaded weapons, that they blocked Arbery's exits. If they simply wanted to confront him, they could have done so on foot. If they had been concerned that he was committing burglary, they could have called the police. They could have filmed whatever they thought Arbery was doing wrong with their phones and shown law enforcement.

No, they felt they were doing the right thing, every single step of the way.

I don't think they thought that what they were planning to do was murder. Or that it was murder. They felt that Arbery was in the wrong for being in their neighborhood, for looking around at a construction site, for attempting to elude them when they chased him down. They felt that him attempting to grab a loaded rifle that they had pointed at him, after chasing him down was him threatening them and was wrong and that McMasters was in the right for shooting him. Even after their convictions. They totally felt justified in every action they took. To be honest, I'm not sure that 'thought' was that big a part of their actions that day. They felt they were in the right and still do.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Did the murderers think Arbery was hoping to find a hammer or bag of nails a worker had left behind?

Great question. Based on inanity of some previous posts in this thread, one might surmise that since he wasn't wearing socks, it proves he was going to steal sheet rock and run home with it.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Still waiting for Tom to answer the question...

 

[Toni]

[removed]

I understand that you feel attacked in this thread. Certainly I did not mean to attack you.

But instead of clarifying what you mean when it appears that you believe I and others have misunderstood you, you simply ignore or double down or claim strawmen when people merely quote your words back to you.

Speaking for myself, nothing I have asked was intended as any kind of gotcha. I just am genuinely interested in exactly what it was that Arbery did that made you believe that he was casing a construction site. Instead of answering how my post was full of a 'remarkable army of strawmen' when mostly it was just quotes of your post, asking specific questions, you avoid the question by misdirection. I'm being very sincere when I try to engage you. I believe that others are as well.

 

[J842P]

No, the immediate reason is someone chose to shoot him unecessarily multiple times.

Yes, because Ahmaud choose to wrestle their gun from them.
Look, prosecutors did a great job and defense did a horrible job and jury was influenced by public opinion.
I find it weird how much of it depends on lawyers and public opinion.

No, it was a straightforward application of the law as written. There was pretty much no way not to convict for felony murder once it was established that their claim of citizen's arrest was not going to hold up.

So logic is: They did not claim citizen's arrest therefore it was lynching?
there is nothing in between?

No, because without a valid claim of citizen's arrest, what they did was simply aggravated assault, and false imprisonment. You cannot arrest someone randomly, that is a crime, only police can arrest people legally, and that heavily controlled by law. And if your arrest involves chasing them down with a gun and a pickup truck, that is aggravated assault (again, pretty much a straightforward application of assault laws). Both of these are felonies. Take your pick.

 

[J842P]

CNN calls it lynching of a jogger. Nuances my ass.

I repeat, he was not a jogger, it was not a lynching, and Arbery would have been alive today if he decided against attacking a guy with a gun and these 3 idiots would have been in prison on much lesser charges.
It's a case of a 4 idiots and idiotic gun laws.

He went for the gun because he expected to die if he didn't.

Was it reasonable to have that expectation?
And he went to attack a leaving police officer because ........

It's immaterial. In that moment, the McMichaels were committing several felonies. If you rob a store, and a customer confronts you and grabs your gun, you struggle and the gun goes off and kills the customer, you are guilty of murder.

 

[J842P]

From a point of view of Arbery these 3 idiots were legally detaining him.
And even from a point of view of court illegality is not that obvious.
It rests on the fact that they did not see him trespassing with their own eyes. That's pretty weak offence. Someone saw him and told them, they trusted him and in the end they chased the RIGHT guy.

No, as far as I understand, the people who are claiming citizen's arrest must have firsthand knowledge that a felony is being committed. In this case, at best, they knew misdemeanor trespassing had been committed. They knew a burglary had been committed at this residence at some point in the past, but that doesn't justify them apprehending any trespasser after the fact.

 

[J842P]

I am a grown man

Which part of my post are you waving away?

All of them. 3 idiots were trying to do citizen's arrest, which was a thing at the time.
Now I understand it's no longer a thing in Georgia which is good I guess. I am assuming rednecks actually aware of the change.

Right, but they did not meet the criteria for citizens arrest, even at the time. If you choose to do this, and you fuck up, that is entirely on you. Because at that point, you are guilty of false imprisonment and, depending on the particulars, assault, aggravated assault (as in this case) etc. Those are felonies. Now you are in serious trouble if you kill someone, because now you are guilty of felony murder. Even, if they killed someone other than who they were assaulting.