Trayvon II: Ahmaud Arbery

[PPQer]

Here we go again.  I'm assuming most here have heard about this.  "Innocent young black man jogging chased down and murdered by white supremacists" seems to be the description of the MSM.   In fact, the young guy with a criminal history attacked a man with a shotgun, and apparently intended to take it away from him, and I suspect to use it.  Of course they use his high school picture instead of his current mugshot.  Young innocent Ahmaud could have turned around or kept running, but chose to attack.  The white guy, who had zero authority, won the altercation, but now he is the next sacrificial lamb.

What kind of person attacks a man holding a shotgun?  Stupid all around.  My personal opinion is the white guys didn't have any business interrogating anyone, and young Ahmaud could have kept running and avoided them.  

So many times over the years, I've seen videos of encounters where one bad move (like attacking a man with a shotgun) changed the perspective of guilt in the eyes of the law.

The cowardly prosecutor punts to a Grand Jury so he can get the outcome he wants.  The old ham sandwich thingy.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/prosecutor-concluded-that-two-white-men-who-shot-ahmaud-arbery-were-in-perfectly-legal-territory/ar-BB13KOwi

Prosecutor concluded that two white men who shot Ahmaud Arbery were in 'perfectly legal' territory

ATLANTA — The district attorney who previously led the investigation into Ahmaud Arbery's death told police he did not see grounds for an arrest of the two white men who killed Arbery or the man who recorded it from his vehicle, according to a memo obtained by USA TODAY. 

Waycross Judicial Circuit District Attorney George E. Barnhill said in the memo that Gregory McMichael, his son Travis McMichael and their neighbor William Bryan were in "hot pursuit of a burglary suspect" when they shot Arbery, a 25-year-old black man, as he jogged through the Satilla Shores neighborhood just outside of Brunswick, Georgia on Feb. 23. Barnhill sent the memo to Glynn County Police Capt. Tom Jump

"It appears it was their intent to stop and hold this criminal suspect until law enforcement arrived," Barnhill wrote. "Under Georgia law, that is perfectly legal." 

Start the day smarter. Get all the news you need in your inbox each morning.

Barnhill also identifies William Bryan, who is white, as the man who shot the video of the killing of Arbery. Bryan has an address listed in the Satilla Shores neighborhood, according to the police report. 

The decision not to arrest the McMichaels or Bryan has fueled outcry across the nation with attorneys for Arbery's family saying he was racially profiled. Local officials and community leaders say a history of nepotism and privilege in the district attorney offices of Waycross and Brunswick has allowed the killers to remain free. 

Barnhill said in the letter that he was recusing himself from the case over a conflict of interest. In the memo, he stated that Arbery's mother wanted him off the case because his son worked in the Brunswick District Attorney's office. 

Brunswick District Attorney Jackie Johnson had previously recused herself from the case because Gregory McMichael was a retired investigator from her office. Gregory McMichael is also a former Glynn County police officer. 

"You have relational connections that run back for generations," said Rev. John Perry II, president of the Brunswick NAACP. "We believe the privilege of relationships caused the delay we are experiencing." 

Perry has called for Glynn County Police Chief John Powell, who is currently on paid administrative leave for violating oath of office in an unrelated matter, to step down.  

“Based on his negligence to say that an arrest should be made, there is no way that our taxpayer dollars should be paying him," Perry said. 

The case is now being led by Atlantic Judicial Circuit District Attorney Tom Durden and the Georgia Bureau of Investigations. 

Durden has promised to send the case to a grand jury to consider criminal charges. But that may not happen until June because Georgia courts are largely closed due to the coronavirus.

The video of Travis McMichael shooting Arbery has been spread widely on social media.

Alan Tucker, a criminal defense attorney in Brunswick, said in a statement Thursday that he released the video because "there was entirely too much speculation, rumor, false narratives and outright lies surrounding the event."

"My sole purpose in releasing the video was absolute transparency because my community was being ripped apart by erroneous accusations and assumptions," said Tucker, adding that he had not been retained by anyone for the case.

Tucker did not respond to a request for comment on why he had the video. 

Benjamin Crump, an attorney for the Arbery family, posted a photo on Twitter Thursday of a man he says is Bryan.

"If he chased down Ahmaud and filmed his execution, he should be arrested and charged with aiding and abetting them in committing this crime of murder," Crump said. 

Gregory McMichael told police they followed Arbery because he appeared to be the person seen on a surveillance video breaking into homes, the police report said. 

USA TODAY filed an open public records request with the Glynn County Police Department for burglaries and home break-ins in the Satilla Shores neighborhood between Jan. 1 and Feb. 23. The department's records office said in an email Thursday it had no records matching that request. 

In Barnhill's memo, he said the video shows Arbery attacking Travis McMichael which led to a tussle over McMichael's shot gun. He suggests that it's unclear who pulled the trigger leading to Arbery's death. 

"Arbery's mental health records and prior convictions help explain his apparent aggressive nature and his possible thought pattern to attack an armed man," Barnhill wrote. 

Glynn County Commissioner Allen Booker said he doesn't fault the Glynn County Police Department for not making the initial arrest and believes Johnson's office made the call. 

“It's obvious there was special treatment because they aren't in jail," Booker said.

Booker said Arbery was a family friend and often saw him in the neighborhood doing landscaping work with his father. He described Arbery as "polite" and "always smiling." 

"Everybody is mad, heartbroken, some folks who grew up here say we know that racism is here in this community like every where else," Booker said. "But we didn’t think there were folks with that much hatred that they would hunt down a young man like a dog and kill him. And then not be in jail for it."

Contributing: Grace Hauck of USA TODAY

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Prosecutor concluded that two white men who shot Ahmaud Arbery were in 'perfectly legal' territory

 

https://thebrunswicknews.com/news/local_news/police-report-sheds-more-light-on-satilla-shores-shooting/article_2d7c05c8-36d3-55b5-ae11-60ea763095b3.html

[Dric902]

Trayvon Martin was attempting to beat a man to death

this guy was going jogging

 

.

[Maser]

The responses I have seen about this case are......well........let's just say very much on the spectrum if you know what I mean.  People really need to find better ways to spend their time than to play an armchair lawyer on the internet. 

[Huaco Kid]

38 minutes ago, Dric902 said:

Trayvon Martin was attempting to beat a man to death

this guy was going jogging

I don't know the lead-up or any backstory (haven't read anything at all about it) but I saw the video and saw a running man take a 90 degree turn and run directly at, and into,  a guy holding a rifle.

That's what the video showed.  I'm not making any judgements.

[tadbart]

Lots of times, there's a lot of stupid that happens before someone gets shot. Seems like there was plenty to go around in this instance, too.

 

You can do something that is perfectly within the scope of the law, and still be stupid. I would also suggest not attacking a man holding a shotgun.

[gwalchmai]

I've learned to be very suspicious whenever the MSM comes up with one of these travesties of justice. Too often things are not as they are presented. Let's see how the facts play out in court...

[holyjohnson]

the key missing part of the Video before where it goes from someone jogging along, yet being followed by a Camera to them fighting over a Shotgun in a driveway is pretty crucial to knowing exactly what happened.

it may be Legal in Georgia to carry a loaded weapon in the open.

but i doubt a Jury will see it as Self Defense when you put yourself in the Danger your defending yourself from.

i also suspect the missing part of the Video is intentional.

i have Zero Interest in the MSM interpretation of what happened and less Trust in what they report, but the Video looks really bad.

Edited May 8, 2020 by holyjohnson

[Historian]

1 hour ago, Dric902 said:

 

this guy was going jogging

I have a feeling he had his ear buds in and never saw it coming.

[PPQer]

31 minutes ago, holyjohnson said:

the key missing part of the Video before where it goes from someone jogging along, yet being followed by a Camera to them fighting over a Shotgun in a driveway is pretty crucial to knowing exactly what happened.

it may be Legal in Georgia to carry a loaded weapon in the open.

but i doubt a Jury will see it as Self Defense when you put yourself in the Danger your defending yourself from.

i also suspect the missing part of the Video is intentional.

i have Zero Interest in the MSM interpretation of what happened and less Trust in what they report, but the Video looks really bad.

Most of the videos are edited, but the runup to the incident is at a distance and very choppy.  The only usable part is what you see, starting with Arbery running a few yards behind the truck, then running up to the front of the truck and attacking the guy with the shotgun.  I think the guy recording was trying to drive and record at the same time.  At one point just before the incident, the camera was pointed at the side of the road and a couple mail boxes.

[PPQer]

28 minutes ago, Historian said:

I have a feeling he had his ear buds in and never saw it coming.

He saw it coming because he started it.  From what I've read, they tried to talk to him before, and drove out ahead of him to try and stop him.

I wonder if at some point after taking a shotgun blast to the throat if it dawned on him it would have been better to just keep running.   

[TBO]

Driver of truck gets out with a shotgun, stands his ground... then goes up and around the front of his truck... closing in on the jogger... and a struggle over the gun ensues.

If two unknown guys with guns chased you down what would you do?

If a guy holding a shotgun on you closed up right on top of you... Would it be safer to try to run away, or seize the gun?

Do you have a right to defend yourself from unknown men who rush up to you with guns drawn?

Sent from my Jack boot using Copatalk

[PPQer]

53 minutes ago, gwalchmai said:

I've learned to be very suspicious whenever the MSM comes up with one of these travesties of justice. Too often things are not as they are presented. Let's see how the facts play out in court...

Here is a video of the fraud of the Zimmerman trial.  It's long but you can fast forward through the slow parts.  

Cliff notes version:  the portly girl pretending to be Trayvons girl friend was lying, and it should have been obvious.

It's long, but interesting.

 

 

[PPQer]

7 minutes ago, TBO said:

Driver of truck gets out with a shotgun, stands his ground... then goes up and around the front of his truck... closing in on the jogger... and a struggle over the gun ensues.

If two unknown guys with guns chased you down what would you do?

If a guy holding a shotgun on you closed up right on top of you... Would it be safer to try to run away, or seize the gun?

Do you have a right to defend yourself from unknown men who rush up to you with guns drawn?

Sent from my Jack boot using Copatalk
 

I suspect if I ran up on a guy and tried to take him shotgun, I would be considered the aggressor.

If they had previously encountered him, and I think they did, instead of running up to the truck and attacking the shooter, he could have turned around and gone back, or even kept running.

There is a backstory.  They said there is video evidence of him stealing something.  In a situation like this, the complete truth is going to be hard to find. 

Stupid on both sides of the shooting.  I bet all involved wish they had it to do over again.

 

[TBO]

I suspect if I ran up on a guy and tried to take him shotgun, I would be considered the aggressor.

If they had previously encountered him, and I think they did, instead of running up to the truck and attacking the shooter, he could have turned around and gone back, or even kept running.

There is a backstory.  They said there is video evidence of him stealing something.  In a situation like this, the complete truth is going to be hard to find. 

Stupid on both sides of the shooting.  I bet all involved wish they had it to do over again.

 

Watch the video closely.

 

Driver exits truck with shotgun and takes cover... then he advances up and around front of truck (chasing down jogger).

 

That's quite different from saying the jogger runs over and attacks him.

 

Watch the video, slow it down.

 

Sent from my Jack boot using Copatalk

 

 

 

[Pistolay]

I've been following this story for a couple of days, and I've watched the video several times. I can't believe people are actually trying to defend these guys. First off, McMichael is a FORMER investigator and a FORMER cop. People are acting like he still has a badge, and he doesn't. Three civilians went after Arbery with guns because they THOUGHT he was committing burglaries in the neighborhood. Are you ******* kidding me? If I was a black guy out running and I see multiple vehicles with white guys with guns coming at me, yeah, I'm probably going to think I've run into the local KKK, and I'm going to try to defend myself.

I'm sorry, but if you're not LEO, you've got no business chasing somebody with guns because you think he might have committed a property crime. I see tonight that those guys have been charged with murder, and that was the right call.

[TBO]

Sent from my Jackboot using Copatalk

[Maser]

49 minutes ago, Pistolay said:

I've been following this story for a couple of days, and I've watched the video several times. I can't believe people are actually trying to defend these guys. First off, McMichael is a FORMER investigator and a FORMER cop. People are acting like he still has a badge, and he doesn't. Three civilians went after Arbery with guns because they THOUGHT he was committing burglaries in the neighborhood. Are you ****ING kidding me? If I was a black guy out running and I see multiple vehicles with white guys with guns coming at me, yeah, I'm probably going to think I've run into the local KKK, and I'm going to try to defend myself.

I'm sorry, but if you're not LEO, you've got no business chasing somebody with guns because you think he might have committed a property crime. I see tonight that those guys have been charged with murder, and that was the right call.

 

I personally wouldn't pay much attention to the folks defending the morons because judging by their posts I've seen at various forums already, it's clear they're trolls from /pol/ and are just trying to be edgy.  That's the problem with this quarantine is every kid is playing on internet forums when they should be getting fragged in CoD.  

[AK_Stick]

5 hours ago, Huaco Kid said:

I don't know the lead-up or any backstory (haven't read anything at all about it) but I saw the video and saw a running man take a 90 degree turn and run directly at, and into,  a guy holding a rifle.

That's what the video showed.  I'm not making any judgements.

You run from a knife, you charge a gun.....

[AK_Stick]

4 hours ago, PPQer said:

He saw it coming because he started it.  From what I've read, they tried to talk to him before, and drove out ahead of him to try and stop him.

I wonder if at some point after taking a shotgun blast to the throat if it dawned on him it would have been better to just keep running.   

Yeah so much better to be shot in the back.......

[EdTracker]

And then the Zen Master said "We'll see"

[PPQer]

5 hours ago, AK_Stick said:

Yeah so much better to be shot in the back.......

He wouldn't have been shot in the back.  If he was laying an ambush, then why didn't he shoot when he first saw Arbery?  They white guys were stupid, but they had already had chances to murder him.

 

[Historian]

9 hours ago, TBO said:

Driver of truck gets out with a shotgun, stands his ground... then goes up and around the front of his truck... closing in on the jogger... and a struggle over the gun ensues.

If two unknown guys with guns chased you down what would you do?

If a guy holding a shotgun on you closed up right on top of you... Would it be safer to try to run away, or seize the gun?

Do you have a right to defend yourself from unknown men who rush up to you with guns drawn?

Sent from my Jack boot using Copatalk
 

This is exactly what it looks like to me. 

 

[PPQer]

8 hours ago, Pistolay said:

I've been following this story for a couple of days, and I've watched the video several times. I can't believe people are actually trying to defend these guys. First off, McMichael is a FORMER investigator and a FORMER cop. People are acting like he still has a badge, and he doesn't. Three civilians went after Arbery with guns because they THOUGHT he was committing burglaries in the neighborhood. Are you ****ING kidding me? If I was a black guy out running and I see multiple vehicles with white guys with guns coming at me, yeah, I'm probably going to think I've run into the local KKK, and I'm going to try to defend myself.

I'm sorry, but if you're not LEO, you've got no business chasing somebody with guns because you think he might have committed a property crime. I see tonight that those guys have been charged with murder, and that was the right call.

I don't think anyone is defending them.  I'm looking at it to learn from it.  Too many times we see people with permits make borderline decisions and it going bad for them.  I don't understand why they weren't arrested the day of the incident, and the only conclusion I can come up with is because Arbery physically assaulted the guy and it was a fight for the gun.  We don't know that the shotgun was pointed at him when he attacked.  What we can assume is Arbery started the physical part of the confrontation.  I may be naive, but I refuse to believe a LEA or DA would let them walk away because they are white.  I was taught in a class that included retention skills that if someone is trying to take your gun, you have to full retard and kill them.  They are not considered unarmed when they have their hands on your gun.

I agree that they had no business messing with the guy, and they are about to learn their lesson.  And once again, lives are lost and changed because of momentary indiscretions and stupid acts and decisions.  The fact the father was retired LEO makes me wonder how he could get into that situation.

 

I look at a situation like this and know that there is no way I would be on either side of that conflict.

 

 

   

  

[PPQer]

10 hours ago, TBO said:

If a guy holding a shotgun on you closed up right on top of you... Would it be safer to try to run away, or seize the gun?

Do you have a right to defend yourself from unknown men who rush up to you with guns drawn?

Sent from my Jack boot using Copatalk
 

Recent history proves it would be better to run away, as trying to seize the gun got him dead.  I don't accept the assumption the guy would have shot him in the back, or even that he was laying an ambush.  I may be wrong, but if it was an ambush, Arbery would have been shot immediately in front of the truck.

Do I have a right to defend myself when a suspected criminal rushes me and tries to take my gun from me?  But of course, they created the situation by harassing Arbery.

The guys did not rush up to him with guns drawn.  They were stationary at a parked truck.  Arbery ran up to them, and I assume he knew from a previous contact what they had in mind.  If Arbery had been shot in front of that truck, it would be obvious.  But there was a fight for the gun, and I assume that is what LE considered from the beginning.

 

Aside from all that, why weren't they arrested that day?  I'm asking from a interested perspective, not argumentative, because I don't get it.  This is one of those stupid situations that would be a nightmare to be involved in.  But I don't go armed looking for a chance to shoot.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2020 by PPQer

[Historian]

55 minutes ago, PPQer said:

I agree that they had no business messing with the guy, and they are about to learn their lesson.  And once again, lives are lost and changed because of momentary indiscretions and stupid acts and decisions.   

This.

Packing heat requires clear thinking.   You will be judged by every action.  Even if you are in the right.

So much of this could have been solved by phoning in the young man,  providing clear observations of where he went, and waiting for the on duty cops (not retired) to show up.

This kid didn't know who the hell those men in the truck were.    A uniformed car....an officer would likely have made the difference.

My bet is this matter could have been cleared up with a conversation. The young man regularly jogged through that area.  That's a clue.  He lives nearby...unless he's getting ready for a marathon. 

Edited May 8, 2020 by Historian