Criminal Justice

It Took Georgia Officials 2 Months To Arrest and Charge Father and Son With Ahmaud Arbery's Murder

In February, two white men shot and killed Ahmaud Arbery, a black 25-year-old.

|

In February, two white men shot and killed Ahmaud Arbery, a black 25-year-old. On Thursday, roughly two months after his death, the men were arrested and charged for murder.

The Shooting

The Brunswick News reports that two people called 911 after seeing Arbery in their Brunswick, Georgia, neighborhood on February 23. One caller told the emergency dispatcher that Arbery was seen near a construction site and was running down the street. The second caller reported Arbery running down the street. Neither caller detailed a crime occurring, even when prompted by the dispatcher.

Nearly two months prior, a Smith & Wesson M&P 9mm pistol had been stolen from a pickup truck parked at the home of Travis McMichael, 34. He told police that his father, Gregory McMichael, 64, moved the pickup truck to another spot in front of the home and forgot to lock the vehicle. Shortly after, Travis found an empty handgun holster, indicating that the gun was stolen.

On the day of his death, the McMichaels chased Arbery in their truck with guns after seeing him run through the neighborhood. They told police that they believed he was the burglar. After the McMichaels took off after Arbery, they stopped their truck in the middle of the road, likely in an attempt to cut him off. Arbery struggled with one of the armed McMichaels while the other shot at him from the back of the pickup truck. Arbery then tried to run away but collapsed in the middle of the road.

Arbery's family said the young man, a former all-star linebacker at Brunswick High, was simply jogging, as he often did. He was unarmed.

A video of the fatal confrontation has since gone viral:

According to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI), Travis is the one who ultimately killed Arbery.

Delayed Arrests

It took two months for officials to bring charges against the McMichaels.

The Brunswick News reports that there were several conflicts of interest, seeing as the elder McMichael was a Glynn County police officer for seven years, followed by a 20-year career as an investigator for the Brunswick District Attorney's (D.A.) Office. Brunswick D.A. Jackie Johnson recused herself and the case was assigned to Ware County D.A. George E. Barnhill. Barnhill also had to recuse himself after it was discovered that his son, George F. Barnhill, worked for the Brunswick D.A.

In a letter to Captain Tom Jump of the Glynn County Police Department (GCPD), Barnhill expressed his belief that the McMichaels conducted a legal citizen's arrest. Because of this, the autopsy, and the video, Barnhill did "not see grounds for arrest."

The case was turned over to Hinesville D.A. Tom Durden.

On Tuesday, Durden released a letter saying he would bring the case before a grand jury "for consideration of criminal charges." Because of shutdowns related to the COVID-19 pandemic, however, Durden wouldn't be able to bring the case before a grand jury until June 12, nearly four months after Arbery's death.

Following public outcry, both over the lack of arrests and Durden's decision to wait on a grand jury, the GBI announced on Thursday that the McMichaels had been arrested and charged with murder and aggravated assault. The GBI also explained that it began investigating the shooting in partnership with Durden upon his request and received the case file earlier in the week.

Additionally, the GCPD, which conducted its own investigation into the shooting, had previously asked the GBI to investigate threats against the department and the release of the video showing Arbery's death.

Reactions

Attorney Lee Merritt, who is representing Arbery's family, said the public's attention was the "turning point" in the case.

Politicians, including U.S. Rep. Doug Collins, U.S. Sen. Kelly Loeffler, and Gov. Brian Kemp, have all expressed their support for the GBI's investigation.

President Donald Trump offered his condolences "to the parents and to the loved ones of the young gentleman" on Thursday. Trump said he would receive a "full report" later in the evening.

Rep. Justin Amash, who is exploring a presidential run with the Libertarian Party, said Arbery's death was a reminder that "we still do not live the truth that all are created equal."

Amash also called out "double standards in law enforcement" while reacting to the McMichaels' arrest.

Democratic presidential front-runner and former Vice President Joe Biden tweeted, "It is time for a swift, full, and transparent investigation into his murder."

Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union compared Arbery's death to Trayvon Martin's 2012 "Stand Your Ground" death, in which George Zimmerman reported a "suspicious person" after seeing Martin in his Florida neighborhood. Martin was ultimately shot by Zimmerman, who was ultimately found not guilty of murder or manslaughter. (Martin was unarmed.)

Commentators across the political spectrum have also spoken out.

What's Next?

The GBI will hold a press conference this morning. Merritt will also hold a press conference at a date to be determined.

Civilians have organized a running campaign for Friday in support of Arbery. A Facebook page called "I RUN WITH MAUD" was created to bring attention to the shooting.

NEXT: Are Spaniards "Persons of Spanish Culture"?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Colored or white, unarmed persons confronted with armed persons are best served by putting their hands in the air and saying “Don’t shoot.” That increases your chances of proving you were just jogging, or coming home from the candy store, or weren’t the guy who gave you the finger when driving by, or selling loosies, or – even if you were doing something wrong – accepting your punishment is less a consequence than immediate execution from some trigger-happy goon.

    1. LEO types will shoot you when you raise your hands, even when your hands are empty, or you are holding a cell phone, or you move your hand in the wrong direction, like the guy face down in a hotel hallway begging for you life.. Or they’ll shoot you in your living room, or thru the window, or from the passenger seat of the patrol car, or because the stairwell was dark…

      2 months… That says a lot. I’m glad there’s video of this. Without it this would have faded away. If convicted, 20y in a non-LEO unit seems fair. IMO. My guess is they’ll pull out the ‘get of jail free’ card (I feared for my life). If they have enough pals in the courtroom they’ll get off easy.

      1. Change Your Life Right Now! Work From Comfort Of Your Home And Receive Your First Paycheck Within A Week. No Experience Needed, No Boss Over Your Shoulder…cxz. Say Goodbye To Your Old Job! Limited Number Of Spots Open…
        Find out how HERE……SeeMore here

      2. LEO types arrest thousands of people and don’t shoot them with their hand’s up.

        So yeah it can happen, and yeah Murder Hornets can sting you to death, but odds are, you’ll have already died twice from Ebola and Wuhan before it ever happens.

    2. That may be true. But I don’t think it is totally unreasonable to think that when armed strangers are chasing you they might intend to murder you. You are certainly not wrong to try to defend yourself in such a case.

      1. Sarah Y. Gregg Make money online from home extra cash more than $18k to $21k. Start getting paid every month Thousands Dollars online. I have received $26K in this month by just working online from home in my part time.every person easily do this job by just open this link and follow details on this page to get started…. Read More

    3. They are going to have a very hard time proving anything beyond manslaughter. If they were trying to murder him, why didn’t they take any shots at him prior to the struggle for the shotgun? Arbery runs right past the father in the pickup truck and he doesn’t even raise a weapon at him. It’s only when Arbery veers at the son with the shotgun (rather than running past the truck down the road) that they get into a struggle. The father raises his hand to his forehead because obviously this is not what anybody wanted. Now that things are getting serious, by Georgia law, you have a right to self defense if someone goes after your firearm because everyone knows what happens if the other guy gets control of your gun.

      1. Do you have the right of self-defense if you initiate the armed confrontation? I don’t know that you do in Georgia. Or most places.

        1. What do you mean by initiate an armed confrontation? You are allowed to carry firearms in Georgia, and the father is an ex police officer and investigator who was familiar with his criminal history. That’s all they were doing up to the point of the struggle. No one had fired any shots and there was no initiation of violence. They just wanted him to stop and talk/wait for police because he was highly suspicious, given that he set off an alarm and was caught on video.

          1. Disgusting. Open carry and brandishing aren’t the same thing. These thugs were hoping their prosecutor and LEO connections immunize them. So far they’re right, but that doesn’t mean you are.

            1. Nothing you just said makes any sense.

          2. the father is an ex police officer and investigator who was familiar with his criminal history

            He was familiar with this guy’s criminal history despite not knowing who he was at all?

            1. Gregory McMichael was at home on his front lawn when he heard the alarm and Arbery went running past his house. He knew exactly who he was and identified him by name, just the same as you or I would identify someone you knew if they ran past your house.

              1. An “alarm”? Like the Uppity Black Guy Running Through OUR Neighborhood Alarm? THAT alarm?

                1. No the house alarm he set off when he was trespassing on someones property.

                  1. Never happened. Made up story.

          3. Oh my fucking God. Those two yokels were “familiar with his criminal history”? They didn’t even know who the fuck he was! Never mind his “criminal history”. They were a couple of low lifes who managed to have a connection with law enforcement and therefore felt entitled to run down anyone they DIDN’T know running around “their” neighborhood and shoot them if they didn’t stop to be interrogated?
            Those two bums should be publicly hung. Junior first so his useless fuck of a daddy can watch.

            1. The senior McMichael had arrested Arbery several years earlier.

              1. If this were true, why didn’t he tell that to the 911 operators? Listen to both 911 calls – it’s clear they had no idea who Arbery was.

          4. “given that he set off an alarm and was caught on video.”

            This is flat out incorrect. Somebody was caught on video days earlier. He set off no alarms that day. They sawing him running and jumped to conclusions.

            1. That’s not what Wikipedia or the New York Times say. Wikipedia: “On the afternoon of Arbery’s death, he entered a house under construction, triggering the owner’s security system and recording video.”

            2. Appears to be a lot of confusion as to facts and the timeline. This needs to be sorted out. That said, he looked like a jogger on the video. Not someone trying to run and hide out.

              1. Yep. On further easing of the comments, there is Defoe timely a lot of conflicting information. I’m going to sit this out until the facts are worked out.

          5. Any black man running is highly suspicious to a white person, especially down south. When two armed white dudes chase you down, the black guy was most likely scared as hell given the history of police and armed citizens gunning down blacks without question and getting away with it. The black guy most likely figured it was the end of him. What would you do if you believed two armed rednecks were about to kill you? Stand there and allow yourself to get shot? Put yourself in the black man’s shoes for once.
            Wonder how stellar this ex cop’s record is. I have seen cops, about ten of them, gang up on unarmed young black and beat the crap out of him, almost killing him. Of course the young black kid could no fight back as he knew the minute he throws a punch at the cop, it gives the cop every reason to shoot him dead. After collapsing, they dragged this kid in the back seat of the car, I imagined he was dead. after ten minutes they dragged him out of the car and let him stubble away. Apparently they had nothing to charge him with, they just beat the crap out of him for fun? I witnessed this long before the Rodney King incident, when there was no video cameras. That day I came to fully understand why blacks called the police pigs.

            1. “I have seen cops, about ten of them, gang up on unarmed young black and beat the crap out of him, almost killing him”

              Where?

          6. This article has a pretty good take on the nuances of Georgia state law:

            https://thedispatch.com/p/a-vigilante-killing-in-georgia

            The comments at the bottom are worth reading, too, as lawyers and a former prosecutor chime in.

            FWIW, I live in Georgia (though well north of Glynn County). Even if this kid was a burglar, the penalty for burglary is not summary execution. I don’t know what he was thinking, trying to grapple a shotgun away from McMichaels Sr. Fight or flight, I guess. Even so, I think it’s clear the McMichaels and their associate(s) wanted a confrontation and were likely counting on the elder McMichael’s LEO and prosecutor’s office connections to get away with vigilantism. It almost worked, too.

          7. Sarah Loran Six months ago I lost my job and after that I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a great website which literally saved me• I started working for them online and in a short time after I’ve started averaging 15k a month••• The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start••• This is where to start….. Read More Details

      2. Let’s see. You’re running down the road and find that you have been blocked by a pickup truck and are being accosted by two armed men not in uniform.

        Your reaction?

        1. If I have no idea why they are trying to stop me I would do one of many things, perhaps with escalating order:
          1. Stop at a distance and ask “What’s up guys?”
          2. Run off the road and ring someone’s doorbell.
          3. Phone the police
          However, Arbery knew full well who they were and what they wanted. He had just set off a very loud alarm on the property he had entered and ran away from it. The guys in the truck had been trying to get him to stop several minutes before this video, yelling at him to stop. So if that was me, I guess I would stop and explain that I wasn’t stealing anything, just curious and entered the property. Or if I was criminal minded and trying to get away, I would run off the road and maybe try to swim across a river or whatever. Lose them. What I wouldn’t do is charge the massive guy with the shotgun because then the law is on their side.

          1. Source for the claim that they ‘knew who he was’? The police report IDs someone else as the 9-11 caller and mentions nothing about the alleged murderers ‘knowing’ the decedent.

          2. Never happened. Made up story.

  2. It took GA officials two months to follow procedures and carefully determine and address at least two conflicts of interest that would have been detrimental to the case. Since they had files to pass off to other organizations, it seems even during that time there was an investigation.
    I blame the delay on Jusse Smollett.

  3. It’s more likely that race had less to do with the delay in seeking justice here than the fact that the shooter’s accomplice and father is former law enforcement.

    1. Agreed. But there’s no stopping people from making hay like it’s an essential job.

      I’m going to go back to watching Netflix. There’s something about an incident in Waco a few years ago.

      1. I’m happy with their portrayal of the feds in that one

    2. Once a member of the King’s Men, always a member of the King’s Men.

    3. They both work with the soverigns under the AG. Former LEO is just icing.

    4. And buddies with the original DA (but that’s basically the same thing) who tried really hard to cover for them.

  4. I heard that there had been a report of someone stealing from a construction site in the area that matched Ahmaud’s description and that the McMichaels were aware of that, which is why they went after him.

    1. Which would be fine. But if you decide to confront them and use deadly force you better be damned sure of it. ACLU shouldn’t be referencing the Trayvon Martin case. IRC Zimmerman didn’t confront Martin, only followed him and it was Martin who confronted Zimmerman, looping back around attacking him from behind.

      OT: I read your response to my post on the de Rugy article, yesterday. Thanks for that and if you took it as me implying blind fealty to Trump that wasn’t my intention. Was just interested in your thoughts.

      1. You’re welcome, I’m just getting very tired with the constant corruption in the media, the politicians, and the bureaucrats.

        With regards to this, even if what I heard was true, I wouldn’t have recommended confronting Ahmaud, at best they should have followed him till the cops showed up. They aren’t cops and don’t have that authority backing them up. If I got stopped by 2 armed men in the middle of the street for no known (to me) reason, I’d be in fight or flight mode too. Now, I don’t believe the guys went there to “hunt a black man” like some people are saying either, I wouldn’t see this as murder necessarily, but a lesser charge probably.

        1. Exceedingly stupid decisions by the pair. I understand why they followed the guy and trying to hold him for the cops. But you simply can’t do that in this day and age. Call the police—one or both of them should’ve had their ex-coworkers’ personal phone numbers—and let the cops stop and talk to the guy.

          Now, they’re probably going to eat a murder/felony murder charge, and what’s more, they should. Even though it’s not unlikely that this guy probably was stealing shit from the neighborhood. Criminal history including property theft. AIUI, either the father or son arrested was a victim of a recent theft in the neighborhood. Stolen gun out of his truck, something like that.

          And what the hell was the guy filming all of this doing there?

          Call the cops. They’d actually show up, in this particular instance.

          1. From Wikipedia: “Gregory McMichael, aged 64 at the time had spent more two decades working as an investigator with the Brunswick Judicial Circuit District Attorney’s Office until May 2019, in this position, Gregory had previously worked as an investigator on a case involving Arbery. Before that, Gregory had worked as a Glynn County Police Department officer.”

            1. None of which says he was currently a cop when he helped chased Arbery. Or that he was on duty. Or identified himself as a police officer to Arbery.

    2. Some other site had a discussion of this murder, and apparently Georgia law only allows citizens arrest when the crime is hot and was observed by the arresting civilian. It does not cover this situation, where the crime was old and stale and wasn’t observed by anyone, let alone father and son.

      Whether it’s premeditated murder, I do not know; IANAL and every state seems to have its own quirks as to first degree etc.

      1. There had just been an alarm set off at a property, and two calls made to police. Seems like a hot case to me.

        1. Whose property? The father and son? If not their property, how did they know?

          1. Arbery triggered a very loud alarm when he entered the property. He then ran away past Gregory McMichael’s house, who happened to be on his front lawn at the time. McMichael recognized him from his priors and decided he better trail and/or stop him so the cops could deal with it.

            1. Seems reasonable.. almost like probable cause

              1. Seems reasonable to an 8 year old watching Batman. Otherwise it seems like a stupid alibi from a couple of inbred morons.

    3. > I heard that there had been a report of someone stealing from a construction site in the area that matched Ahmaud’s description and that the McMichaels were aware of that, which is why they went after him.

      And under no circumstances, in any place in this nation, was this a good idea.

  5. I’m so glad they were able to eventually “discover” all those conflicts of interest

    1. Sounds like an overly incestuous ruling class.

      1. It’s cousin fucking Georgia so yeah.

        1. Bigoted leftist… so typical

        2. Your bigotry is unbecoming.

      2. Almost as bad as the Regan family on Blue Bloods.

        But seriously, who do you think police and politicians socialize with? Barbers and plumbers? People tend socialize with their own.

  6. Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union compared Arbery’s death to Trayvon Martin’s 2012 “Stand Your Ground” death, in which George Zimmerman reported a “suspicious person” after seeing Martin in his Florida neighborhood.

    The ACLU and similar groups are full of shit. Arbery didn’t jump McMichaels and start pounding his head against the pavement. And Zimmerman didn’t pull a gun and stand athwart Martin’s path, threatening him.

    1. Indeed. If this really is comparable to what happened with George Zimmerman, it should come as no surprise if the verdict comes down as “Not Guilty”.

  7. So it really sounds that, while the murder was likely racist (or certainly enabled by racial stereotypes combined with idiocy), the slow movement of law enforcement was because they were actually being responsible with recusals. I mean, the same people pissed about the two month delay are the same people insisting that society locks down, so of course that gets in the way of convening a grand jury to prosecute racists.

    1. I would guess the slow movement of the case is more to do with the thin blue line. Cops/persecutors giving “professional” courtesy to one of their own.

      1. It’s hard to tell because whether they’re doing favors for law enforcement connected people, or they’re trying to remove conflicts of interest so the prosecution can actually work, it will look like the same thing to an outside observer.

        I tend to agree that this is probably them covering up and giving people time to get their stories straight, but there’s a non-zero chance it’s a prosecutor trying to make sure the case doesn’t instantly get thrown out for obvious conflicts of interest.

    2. No the slow movement has to do with being unable to convene a grand jury until June due to covid.

      1. Eat shit

  8. It’s terrifying how major content providers and news sources are in lock step trying to shill for Arbery. Everyone is ignoring why he was jogging mid day in a neighborhood he doesn’t live in, why he would attack the armed men and try to wrestle for the shotgun specifically, and why nobody thinks he was casing houses despite multiple accounts of him window shopping in the neighborhood and his prior arrest record, which includes weapons charges and shoplifting.

    We don’t need to turn off our brains just because a bunch of black people are crying racism. They were going to do that either way. We know that most burglaries occur from 6am-6pm, most burglars target homes and businesses within a few miles of their home, they are typically young adult men, this man had priors that involve stealing (makes you wonder how many times he hasn’t been caught), etc.

    1. Very astute, there’s also the incident where the Arbery dude brought a loaded handgun to a school gymnasium and wrasled with the cops a few years ago….I hate pig’s, and frankly I see the preferential treatment here to be anathema to a free society, but Im gonna reserve judgement on private citizens fulfilling the role of police, as should be their right.

      1. private citizens fulfilling the role of police, as should be their right

        Well, I suppose if by “role of police” you mean “armed and dangerous and violent and psychopathic thugs”, sure. But if you’re effecting a citizen’s arrest, you should know that you can’t simply investigate a crime and go arrest somebody you think likely to have committed the crime, you have to actually intervene in a crime in progress. Surely a former police officer and a former investigator for the DA’s office knows this law, he just doesn’t believe that, as a former police officer and a former investigator for the DA’s office, those laws apply to him. Laws are only for the peasants and he’s one of the King’s Men.

      2. Didn’t his own family admit he had a personality problem, where basically any confrontation with authority caused him to flip out and start fighting?

        That said, I’m not stopping because two yahoos in a truck with shotguns order me to either. Get a cop to do it, or fuck off.

        I have had an old lady very publicly pull out her cell phone and start videoing my GF and I when we were in the midst of our run. In workout clothes, running shoes, holding a tablet and water bottle. She followed us through two separate streets. We thought it was hilarious. Didn’t say Hello or anything. Just glared.

        Kind of like Zimmerman, now that I think about it, which was one thing that stuck out to me when I read his interview transcripts with a Sanford PD officer. Someone who actually had a cop’s mindset would have talked to Martin when he first saw him. In that loud, overly-fake friendly tone they use. E.g., “Hey! How’s it going? Do you need any help! I don’t remember you from the neighborhood meeting. I’m George Zimmerman.” And so on. All cops do is talk to people all day, when they aren’t filling out paperwork.

        Had that happened, there wouldn’t have been a shooting. Martin would have fucked off back to his dad’s house, and he’d have learned to try and ply his trade in another subdivision further from home.

        1. Believe it or not, if you see someone commit a crime, including burglary or assault, you as a citizen are allowed to stop him and hold him until the authorities arrive. Cops are not omniscient after all.

          1. And this case is an example of why it’s an incredibly stupid idea.

            Maybe they witnessed Arbery trespassing? And maybe, that trespass will be viewed as having been for ‘an unlawful purpose’, which is the other element besides entry onto the land of another that you need to establish that a criminal trespass took place. Even if he was committing criminal trespass, and they witnessed it, it’s only a misdemeanor.

            Citizens arrest while armed to detain a guy for a misdemeanor that I’m not even sure they can prove, or that they actually witnessed, sounds like an outstanding idea. If you want to get sued for everything you own, and maybe face some form of kidnapping or unlawful restraint charge yourself.

            Or they could just call actual police officers to go talk to the guy.

            Personally, if two guys jump out of a truck with shotguns, and run at me, I’m getting behind cover, and probably will try to stop what I perceive as an imminent threat of serious bodily harm. While trying to call the cops.

            1. “Personally, if two guys jump out of a truck with shotguns, and run at me, I’m getting behind cover, and probably will try to stop what I perceive as an imminent threat of serious bodily harm. While trying to call the cops.”

              To bad he didn’t do that. Instead he clearly runs to the right of the truck, then charges at the son with the shotgun, resulting in a life or death struggle for both of them.

              1. They saw him committing a crime? Really? Or they heard a report of a crime. Someone stole something from a construction site. Or possibly the construction company mismanaged inventory or needed insurance money. Sounds like an excuse to me.

                1. You realize you’re just making shit up that you want to believe as much as anybody else, right?

                  1. An edited video presented by the family’s lawyer tends to do that. Just “fill in the blanks Joe” who needs facts?- surely this kid could have looked “just like Obama’s” (or Biden’s) kid.

                    1. Given Hunter Biden’s antics, I wouldn’t be holding him up as a model of virtue. Or even the lowest common denominator of decency.

                    2. An UN edited video show the kid at a construction site and then leaving. In Georgia this is not a felony. Although maybe it is in North Korea.

          2. Quoted from https://thedispatch.com/p/a-vigilante-killing-in-georgia:

            ‘Georgia law does indeed permit a person to execute a citizen’s arrest—in very narrow circumstances. The relevant false arrest statute holds that a “private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.”

            Once the citizen’s arrest is properly made, Georgia law requires the citizen to take the suspect before a judicial officer or peace officer “without any unnecessary delay.”

            It’s also true, however, that an unlawful attempt to take and hold a person is itself a crime—false imprisonment. Under Georgia law, a person commits the crime of false imprisonment “when, in violation of the personal liberty of another, he arrests, confines, or detains such person without legal authority.”

            Now, let’s apply the law to the facts. On the day Arbery died, a 911 caller said a man matching Arbery’s description was walking inside a vacant construction site. Another caller said, “There’s a black male running down the street.” Gregory McMichael claimed he recognized Arbery from “surveillance video” after “several break-ins in the neighborhood.”

            The only “offense” committed in anyone’s presence is the report of a person walking into a construction site. If that merits mounting up an armed three-person, two-vehicle posse to chase a man in broad daylight and menace him with weapons, then many of us are lucky to be alive and free. Just last week I walked into a house under construction in my neighborhood to check out the new floor plans. I didn’t even think to check for an armed gang charging down the street.

            The McMichaels’ other possible argument is that the unspecified video footage from unspecified previous break-ins constituted sufficient “immediate knowledge” that a crime had been committed days or weeks ago, and that alleged older crime provided the McMichaels with “reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion that they were pursuing a fleeing felon.”

            Justifying armed pursuit on that basis would represent a remarkable application and extension of the law. It would empower vigilantism. It would empower citizens to independently investigate crimes and seek to arrest suspects on their own authority.

            McMichael didn’t merely report that Arbery ran by so that police could investigate. He didn’t even simply follow him at a safe distance to keep him in sight until the police arrived. He moved aggressively to arrest Arbery, and he did so based mainly on his subjective interpretation of surveillance videos of alleged previous incidents.’

            —–

            I get the distinct feeling that this is personal for you. A ‘there, but for the grace of God, go I’ situation. And Obama and Biden? What the hell do they have to with any of this? If we’re resorting to adolescent insults and base appeals derived from the cesspool of partisan politics, can we then characterize the McMichaels as more akin to Trump and Bush and other bloodthirsty Neocons?

    2. Everyone is ignoring why he was jogging mid day in a neighborhood he doesn’t live in

      What would be a better time for him to jog? And did he drive to that neighborhood or jog there from his?

      1. Most people do it in the early morning around here, as it gets too damned hot and humid to do it in the middle of the day. That said, it’s not summer yet, and I don’t know how hot it is in Brunswick, Georgia now.

        I jog in neighborhoods I don’t live in too. They’re nicer, for one thing. I also don’t trespass. Did the yahoos witness the victim trespass that afternoon? Or did they think he just looked like the same guy they saw stealing and trespassing on video at another time?

        1. February is fucking cold, everywhere that isn’t Miami or L.A.

          1. It certainly can be in Georgia. Wasn’t too bad here. Weird year all around, including the weather. I’m expecting a blizzard here this winter, at this rate.

            1. Brunswick is directly between Savannah and Jacksonville, roughly halfway.
              This February was pretty mild.
              Weather doesn’t really factor into this case.

          2. 84 today in the arctic wasteland of Portland Oregon

        2. The low that day was 35, the high was 64. Midday was the best time to jog.
          https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/ga/brunswick/KBQK/date/2020-2-23

          You’re reaching without doing basic research, which makes me think you are actually just rationalizing an instinctive position.

        3. JFC people! Why are you debating about how hot or cold it was as if that means anything? People run in all sorts of weather. I’ve done regular running sessions at noon in Dallas in the middle of summer.

        4. “I jog in neighborhoods I don’t live in too. They’re nicer, for one thing. I also don’t trespass. Did the yahoos witness the victim trespass that afternoon?”

          I, personally, only jog on my own block, but I understand that people who jog regularly might jog in different neighborhoods. I also might check out a construction sight or two.

      2. You do have a point on #2. I’ve seen no information yet on whether or not he drove there. The fact that he ran away and not towards a car suggests he didn’t drive there, but maybe he just didn’t make it.

        There is no issue with the time of day that he jogged. There is an issue with multiple reports claiming he was window shopping homes.

        1. Oh, it’s entirely possible he was a shitbag thief. Given his shoplifting history and all. May even have been the guy who was doing the thefts in the area.

          Trying to arrest him when you aren’t a cop, before he’s actually stolen anything, makes it challenging to charge him with any sort of crime though…

          A bonus to letting the cops deal with it is, if he really did have some kind of violent oppositional-defiant mental issue, that he might duke it out with the real cops when they try to talk to him. That’ll at least catch him more time away from their neighborhood than any theft or criminal trespass case they could stick on him. And they get much more leeway to get hands on than John Q. does.

        2. Police have no such reports. He was jogging on a public street. He didn’t have to justify being on a public street to anybody. “What are you doing here?” can be answered with “None of your goddamn business.” Aren’t libertarians concerned with privacy anymore?

    3. Shilling for the victim is unnecessary and foolish. It doesn’t matter what he’s like or what he may have done in the past. The people who killed him didn’t know anything about him. The only relevant question is what happened that day. And what apparently happened was that they chased down a guy who wasn’t doing anything criminal at the time and he defended himself against the two armed men pursuing him. Which is justifiable self defense, whether or not he did anything bad in the past.

      1. Source?
        For any of the knowledge you claim here

      2. so if a guy was in jail for 10 years cause of raping little kids and he is in a playground playing with himself his past should not be brought up? if you knew him when he got out of jail would you let him babysit your kids or overlook his past?

        1. He was jogging down a public street not babysitting anyone’s kids. Although I’d certainly not let anyone babysit my kids if they looked as retarded as the McMichaels.

    4. Wait a minute!

      So what if he was jobbing mid day in a neighborhood he doesn’t live in. That doesn’t give anyone, cops or non-cops the right to block his path and ask what he’s doing there.

      BTDT.

      I worked in a wealthy suburb and used to go walking with a fellow employee at lunch. On day, a man came out of his house and confronted us wanting to know what we were doing there.

      We handled it calmly. He said there had been burglaries in the neighborhood and he just wanted to determine our business there.

      Tough shit! We were walking on public sidewalk, astride a public street and we owed him no explanation. He needed to get over his paranoia and get out of our faces.

      And yes, he was white and so were both of us. But still……………….

    5. “Terrifying” Oh my fucking God. You clown.

  9. Not much good comes from rushing cases, and the cries of racism ring hollow.

  10. Why do all of these stories pain themselves to specify that the victim was unarmed? Arbery could have had more guns on him than Duke Nukem and murdering him for jogging down the street would still be wrong. Likewise, there exist circumstances where shooting unarmed people is absolutely the right thing to do (such as when they are attacking you, trespassing on your property, etc). There is no “proportionality” to attacking people based on what sort of objects they have in their possession. It’s either justified or its not.

    1. FBI crime in America in 2018
      Homicides by weapon used
      672 people murdered by assailants using “personal weapons” (hands, fists, feet, &c)
      Unarmed assailants kill twice as many people per year in USA than assailants armed with rifles of all identified types

  11. Well, while there’s the issue of the mother not bothering to dig into the details when the cops showed up at her door to tell her that her son had been shot in connection with a robbery – almost as if she didn’t think her son being shot in connection with a robbery was suspiciously implausible – I’d have to agree that this incident has less to do with black vs. white and more to do with the King’s Men vs. the peasants.

    We’ll see when the grand jury details come out – is this going to be the peasant’s grand jury where the prosecutor merely presents his evidence for prosecution and the grand jury rubber-stamps the indictment or one of the King’s Men’s grand juries where the defense is allowed to present their side of the story and the prosecutor makes a feeble attempt to pretend that he’s interested in rebutting their arguments? As soon as you hear anything about “full and fair” you’ll know the fix is in, that’s not how they conduct investigations into the behavior of the peasantry.

    1. “that’s not how they conduct investigations into the behavior of the peasantry”

      Maybe it ought to be.

      But I get your point.

    2. It would be interesting if for once the King’s men were black and the peasantry white.

        1. And of course Houston’s Goines

    3. The “defense” doesn’t present anything in grand jury.

    4. I’d also wonder what the response of the mother of the McMichaels duo was when she was informed they just shot and killed a guy in cold blood. Did anybody ask her?

      1. Probably not as there is no reason to do so.

  12. If the deceased victim was white the thugs would never have been arrested.

    See Caroline Small

    1. I don’t know about that. But I do know that the case wouldn’t be national news.

  13. Lots of unanswered questions that will probably never be answered. Like:

    1) Why did they think Arbery was a burglar? I assume they thought he was the one who stole the gun out of their truck, do they have any evidence to support that? Or did they just assume unknown black guy = burglar?
    2) If Arbery regularly went running, why did two “Karens” call 911 to report him to the police? Wouldn’t the sight of him running be familiar to the people in that neighborhood? Of course, there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation: maybe he was changing up his routine and running somewhere other than his usual spot. Or maybe he was up to no good. Who knows?

    I certainly don’t expect to ever get answers to these questions. Everyone’s too busy busting out their Jump to Conclusions mats to bother with answering these or any other relevant questions. I suppose some answers may come about in the trial, but by then the narrative will be set in stone and nothing will change it.

    1. 1. irrelevant. They chased him down and They assaulted him with guns. This is only permissible if he is an imminent threat to them.

      2. You’re looking for “Karens” to have good reasons for calling 911? It also doesn’t matter if he had been seen 1000 times running in that vicinity or if this was the first time. If also doesn’t matter because this event did not involve anyone associated with 911.

      1. 1. So in your view, someone lunging for your weapon and wrestling for it is not an imminent threat?

        2. There were two calls to police and a burglar alarm had been tripped by the suspect, who was recorded by security cameras, at another property that day.

        1. Two strangers accosting you with weapons seems like the imminent threat that started the whole thing. How was the guy to know they weren’t just trying to murder him?

          Did the killers know about #2? If not, it is entirely irrelevant.

          1. Actually not strangers, believe it or not. Gregory McMichael was quite familiar with Arbery because he had been a police officer and investigator for many years. They had been trying to get him to stop that day after Arbery set off a burglar alarm. He identified Arbery by name. Usually if someone knows your name they are not strangers. Some of the things shouted to Arbery include: “Stop, stop, we want to talk to you”. and “Stop! … Watch that. Stop, damn it! Stop!” If I set off a burglar alarm and then thought my life was in danger, I would phone the police or go to a house and ask them to phone the police. I sure wouldn’t charge the massive guy with the shotgun.

            1. So you’d run away and get shot in the back?

              1. Well let’s see, they had been trying for several minutes prior to the video to get him to stop. Each time he would start going the other way or try to evade them. When he ran past the truck to the right, no one tried to shoot him, even though that would have been the prime time to do it if they were “hunting” him. They had repeatedly told him they just want him to stop so they could talk. If I thought there was any chance they were actually trying to shoot me, I guess I would run perpendicular through a yard, or perhaps try to get the attention of someone in their house. The fact that he ran past them at a distance of 6 feet or something probably indicates Arbery didn’t think they were trying to shoot him.

            2. Actually not strangers, believe it or not. Gregory McMichael was quite familiar with Arbery because he had been a police officer and investigator for many years. They had been trying to get him to stop that day after Arbery set off a burglar alarm. He identified Arbery by name.

              You keep posting this, but I couldn’t find any info on this. Can you post a source? If what you’re saying is true, then why on earth did they not convey that to the 911 operators? Below is a link to both 911 calls and each time the name was not mentioned. Both times Arbery was referred to as “a black guy” or “black male.” It is very doubtful that they would hide the fact that they knew the guy.

              https://www.11alive.com/article/news/crime/911-calls-ahmaud-arbery/85-4819d3d9-6133-40de-b3a9-f8fa3f889574

                1. I see. So in his statement to police, he told them he knew who Arbery was. I wonder if he recognized him after they shot him, and added the part about priors to make himself look better. That makes more sense than deliberately hiding the suspect’s identity from the 911 caller right?

                  1. Because murderers never lie about murdering anyone. They always tell the complete truth.

          2. The killers made the 911 calls, he’s just trying to make it seem like more people thought it was an issue with intentionally vague language. Similar to how the construction site is always “another property” when he types it, to try to affect the mind into thinking of it like a burglary. In reality, all we know for sure is that he looked at a around construction site and didn’t take anything, as was confirmed by the site’s owner.

            1. I am fascinated by all things technical, and so I love to stop and look at buildings under construction. I usually won’t go into them, as unfinished buildings can be dangerous, but just looking at them is completely understandable to me.

        2. a burglar alarm had been tripped by the suspect, who was recorded by security cameras, at another property that day.

          Got a citation for this? I haven’t seen that reported anywhere else (although I haven’t followed this story very closely either).

            1. Absolute bullshit.

            2. Yep. Wikipedia is renown for its accuracy.

              1. Actually it is. They have to footnote all the facts to original sources.

        3. 1. So in your view, someone lunging for your weapon and wrestling for it is not an imminent threat?

          An imminent threat that they created when they decided to hop in their truck and chase him down on foot. Even if they knew about #2, when he tried to run they should have let him go because the threat to whoever’s property he was allegedly trying to burgle was gone the second he started running.

          Situations like this are why it’s generally a bad idea to go chasing after people with guns drawn after they’ve already started to flee. You have no idea what’s going to happen when/ if you catch up to them. People are no different than frightened wild animals at that point, they may not do the rationale thing and just surrender, especially to a couple of people whose intentions aren’t known. For all he know they were going to kill him whether he surrendered or not. Given that it’s not entirely irrational to fight back and take your chances either.

          1. I agree with some of what you are saying. What I violently disagree with is that A) They are murderers B) They were hunting him. C) They are racist and hunting him because he is black.

            That is pure BS that will ensure a miscarriage of justice and perhaps race riots and innocent deaths down the line.

            1. What I violently disagree with is that A) They are murderers B) They were hunting him. C) They are racist and hunting him because he is black.

              Same here, we’re pretty close to the same page. I could see manslaughter since they did chase him when it wasn’t necessary, but murder seems like a stretch (especially if it’s 1st degree murder – there’s no pre-meditation here). And of course, I find it highly unlikely that these were a couple of “racist crackers out hunting blacks for sport” or some shit either. And the only reason I say “highly unlikely” is because I don’t know these two.

              What this seems to be, to me, is an unnecessary situation that quickly escalated out of control resulting in the death of a young man who in all likelihood wasn’t a saint, but didn’t deserve to be killed either.

              1. Felony murder. He was killed when they were in the process of committing a crime.

            2. A) whether they are murderers or not is a question of law at this point, and for a jury to decide.
              B) they were clearly hunting him (although this is not the best word to describe their behavior) they were plainly and clearly pursuing Abrey in order to apprehend him. One can hunt to capture or hunt to kill.
              C) I agree. I do not have crystal balls and do not read minds. Neither does anyone else.

      2. Yeah, this. The only question is was the use of deadly force legitimate self defense. Based on my limited knowledge, I would say no. I don’t know about 1st degree murder, but it’s certainly reckless and dangerous conduct. Probably also assault to come at someone with guns drawn who you have not actually seen committing any crime.

        1. Uh, if someone lunges for your firearm and tries to wrestle it away from you, you are not allowed to defend yourself? Thankfully Georgia law disagrees with you.

          1. Sure. Had Aubrey pulled a weapon on THEM when they were menacing him by following him in a truck and THEN sonny boy took a shot at him, sure.
            Otherwise I’m seeing Felony Murder. Even if Aubrey had a heart attack and died after these yoyos confronted him with shotguns, they’d be guilty of that.

            1. GBI says felony murder and aggravated assault.

              All depends on if there was PC to make the stop/arrest in the first place. I can’t tell because I haven’t been able to put together a time line of when the various surveillance videos were available to the McMichaels and what knowledge they had at the time of the stop/arrest.

              I don’t think that the walking through the house under construction can be construed as a trespass – not occupied, not posted. Arbrey’s lawyer (if he had lived and was charged with such) would have argued that it was curtilage. It is also not clear that the McMichaels had 1st hand knowledge of Arbrey’s last vvisit to said house.

              Any reference to any other burglaries/break-ins in the area should be excised from the discussion, as well as impugn the case of whoever brings them up.

          2. You keep saying this like you believe it.

            If the McMichaels had gone out unarmed to talk with Aubrey, and then HE pulled a gun on them, would you support his right to kill them for lunging?

            1. This 10000 times over

              1. You guys could argue with the legitimacy of the law I guess, but at the time of this incident these are the laws they are operating under in Georgia. You are allowed to openly carry firearms. The McMichaels did nothing wrong there. You are allowed to make a citizens arrest. The McMichaels did nothing wrong there. If someone charges at you and attempts to wrestle away your firearm, you are allowed to use lethal force to prevent that. Now to be fair, watching the video slowly and carefully, I can’t even see any proof that the son intended to shoot him. It looks more like a life and death struggle initiated by Arbery and the son might have just been trying to discharge both barrels in case Arbery took control of the weapon. Shooting the shells into the ground would have served the purpose just as well.

                1. They did quite a bit of things wrong. Allegedly the father knew Arbery’s identity. Why chase him? You know who he is and how to find him. Why not just make file a police report?

                  Another problem with this is why they had guns drawn in the first place. I was taught by a NRA instructor that a gun is not to be used to coerce or intimidate, the proper use is to shoot someone. Why did they have their firerams drawn if they hadn’t already intended to shoot him? I could possibly give jr. a pass, but a trained law enforcement officer doesn’t understand this concept?

                  It looks more like a life and death struggle initiated by Arbery

                  Not even close. The McMichaels initiated this. They chose to run him down while brandishing a firearm. The alternative was to call the police and make a statement.

                2. So if you come up to me (especially when I am unarmed) and you have two friends with you and you have a gun, I’m the bad guy for trying to defend myself from the gun you’re pointing at me? God, the fragility of these people is astounding. This new world where you can be the one rolling around pointing guns at people and if they try to stop you you can kill them because YOU felt threatened?

                3. The McMichaels did nothing wrong to arrest Arbrey, if and only if they had PC to arrest him. It does not appear that this was the case.

      3. It wasn’t my intention to imply that they were somehow justified in what they did, at the very least they’re probably guilty of manslaughter.

        Of course, we do know some details. The two guys in the truck were, in fact, chasing after the jogger (therefore they initiated the confrontation) because they thought the guy was a burglar. I’m just wondering why they thought that? Did they see him do something wrong, or is this a case of “two racisty racist crackers from GA saw a black guy they didn’t recognize and just assumed he was up to no good, because they’re racists, and then decided to go chase him down with guns, again, because racists.” Or, did they see him attempt to do something and then made the the very stupid* decision to chase him?

        I’m pretty sure I know which way the narrative will be spun. The media will spin it as “racist ass GA crackers hunting blacks for sport.” Who knows, maybe they’ll even be able to get riots this time. That’ll make them happy.

        *Stupid because this is exactly the kind of shit that can happen when you go chasing someone down with guns. Even if they witnessed him doing something illegal they should have just let him go when he ran off instead of jumping in their truck and chasing after him. At the very least these are a couple of mental midgets.

        1. “I’m just wondering why they thought that?” Because an alarm was just set off and he was running away from it. Because he recognized him as Ahmaud Arbery because of his priors. Because he was a former police officer and investigator who was involved with those priors. Because he was very familiar with Georgia law, having worked for the DA.

          “At the very least these are a couple of mental midgets.”
          I guess you think cowardice is a form of intelligence. On principle I don’t fault these guys for wanting to ensure justice was served. They just wanted him to surrender to the police so they could sort it out legally. It went wrong unfortunately.

          1. I guess you think cowardice is a form of intelligence. On principle I don’t fault these guys for wanting to ensure justice was served.

            Not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying it’s extremely dumb to go chasing after someone with guns because this is the exact thing that might end up happening. And since they apparently recognized the guy, knew him by name and had security camera footage of him that just makes their decision to chase after him even dumber. They could have filed a police report, given them the footage and the guy’s name, and let them take it from there. It’s not like they didn’t know who he was. Even if they let him escape I’m pretty sure the police could have found him and arrested his ass later.

            1. Well, if they called the cops, they would just complicate things by having to actually PROVE he committed a crime. That makes things difficult, and who knows? He might even get off for lack of evidence. Can’t let that happen.

          2. “I guess you think cowardice is a form of intelligence.”

            If that were true, you would be a very brave man indeed.

          3. Let’s presume everything you said is true. Is the better course of action to chase the guy down with weapons in a pickup truck, or call the police and provide eyewitness statements? The father & son were not preventing a felony in progress, they were acting on suspicion and unreasonably escalated the situation. They better have a damn good attorney.

            1. Like I’ve been saying multiple times, yes they could be charged and convicted of manslaughter. It certainly doesn’t in any way meet the criteria for murder. And yes, you could argue they shouldn’t have tried to stop him, but these guys don’t have a crystal ball. They thought they would stop the guy and hold him until the police arrived and that would be that. So I can somewhat agree with you that there were better options. I also agree wholeheartedly that Arbery did not deserve to die for trespassing on property, setting off an alarm and then fleeing. It’s more like his action of charging a massive guy with a shotgun that got him killed. None of this matters though because the McMichael’s did not break any laws, therefore are unlikely to be convicted of anything. And now thanks to the media saying “a black man was hunted down for jogging” I guarantee you there will either be a miscarriage of justice or race riots that will result in even more innocents being killed.

              1. these guys don’t have a crystal ball.

                Nor did Arbery. How would he know they weren’t trying to rob or kill him? You’re saying a victim of crime isn’t legally allowed to fight their attacker?

              2. If you’re position is the McMichael’s are innocent until proven guilty, I would wholly agree. If you’re position is they did nothing wrong and do not deserved to be punished, we are a million miles apart.

          4. Where are you getting that an alarm was set off? AFAIK Greg McMichael has not admitted he recognized Arbery from when he investigated him for shoplifting. That’s also not grounds for stopping him and begs the question of why he didn’t tell that to 911 or let the cops handle the situation given he could identify the supposed suspect.

            Citizens arrest laws in Georgia require first hand knowledge of a felony. Walking into an open construction site is not in and of itself a felony or even a crime (criminal trespass, which is a misdemeanor, requires refusing to leave after being asked).

          5. What is your source for there being an alarm that went off? We are told that Arbrey was in/on the property for about 3-4 minutes. If the premises were alarmed, this would not make the tiniest bit of sense. I got to call bullshit on the alarm.

    2. I cant imagine a black guy jogging in a Brunswick, GA neighborhood would be any kind of a rare

  14. The video looks very bad, and people are jumping to many conclusions on all sides. From where I stand, knowing only as much as the next guy, I think the most likely explanation for the slow arrest is a combination of cops protecting (ex)cops and COVID. The kid that got shot, may have been a total scumbag, it certainly sounds like the media is doing everything they can to paint him as the sweetest of angels, in spite of the alleged facts about his past record. Regardless of that stuff, it is most likely irrelevant. As I see it there are three potential ways this went down:

    1) The Dad/Son combo saw the kid actually attempting to steal stuff or clearly casing houses, and attempted to citizen arrest him (this seems to be their defense). Depending on Georgia laws, if they can prove that, and what they actually saw him doing, this could either lead to exoneration, dropping charges to manslaughter, or them getting off because the DA tried to overcharge them.

    2) It was racism. They can and will almost certainly get nailed in court if this is the case (and if not, unfortunately they may still get screwed). If it is racism, they should get screwed to the wall.

    3) A mixture of 1 and 2. They saw a black guy and thought he looked “shady” and thought he matched some description of a robbery suspect from some time ago, and they injected themselves into a situation where they had no authority (and had no immediate cause). If this is the case, they deserve either manslaughter or some sort of lesser murder charge, most likely. That is really going to depend on how they escalated things, and how grossly out of proportion it was.

    1. For my money I’d bet on either 1 or 3, but not 2. Or at least not strictly 2. There’s very few cases these days of “racists hunting blacks for sport” or whatever, but of course the media’s going to spin it as that. It’s basically going to be George Zimmerman all over again.

      1. Brunswick, like a lot of south GA, has a large black population.
        If they were “hunting blacks for sport” I’d think there would be some history of similar incidents prior to this one

  15. Change Your Life Right Now! Work From Comfort Of Your Home And Receive Your First Paycheck Within A Week. No Experience Needed, No Boss Over Your Shoulder…zsz.. Say Goodbye To Your Old Job! Limited Number Of Spots Open…
    Find out how HERE…… See More here

  16. Ok, so am I missing something?

    Reading these comments and others posted online it seems that many of you feel the correct punishment for theft is murder. Should we just start executing every suspected thief?

    I say that because you all keep bringing it up as justification for the entire situation. Oh, the father and son thought he was a thief so that means them killing him is ok.

    Forget due process and the courts! You people disgust me.

    1. I will join you being disgusted.

    2. Nope, they had no intention of killing him. If you watch the video, the dad in the back of the truck doesn’t even take a shot at him when he runs by. The shots are only fired when the suspect starts wrestling with his shotgun. Things became deadly serious at this point and the son with the shotgun really had no choice to defend himself or die. It’s an unfortunate situation to be sure.

      1. “no choice to defend himself or die”?

        How about to de-escalate without giving up control of the weapon? To remind the new friend of the other armed citizen looming? A million other things?

        1. They had been peacefully pursuing him for several minutes up to this point and each time Arbery ran the other direction, trying to evade them. They just wanted him to stop and wait for the police. That’s commendable and quite brave in my opinion. But once Arbery charges him and starts wrestling for his weapon, then what do you suggest? It’s a life and death struggle at that point and the son had every right to defend his life.

          1. “They had been peacefully pursuing him for several minutes up to this point and each time Arbery ran the other direction, trying to evade them.”

            Imagine that, trying to get away from a truck following you.

            “That’s commendable and quite brave in my opinion.”

            Yes, but you Love to be Wrong and are a moron.

            1. “Imagine that, trying to get away from a truck following you.”

              Well, to be fair Arbery knew full well why they were following him. He had just set off a very loud alarm on a property he was trespassing on. They had told him several times to stop and that they just wanted to talk with him, and each time he ran the other way or otherwise evaded them. At no point did they attempt to shoot him, even though they had plenty of opportunities. Arbery probably noticed this as well which makes his decision to charge the huge guy with a shotgun feel quite foolish to me. Do stupid things, get stupid rewards.

              1. You keep repeating that bullshit about the alarm. IF there was an alarm, we still don’t know who set it off or how.

              2. Please show the source claiming that the property was alarmed. Also, please show how you know what Arbrey knew (full well).

        2. “To remind the new friend of the other armed citizen looming? A million other things?”
          Yeah, cause that’s what they teach at the police academy. A million, you say? Identify just 3 that could be effectively accomplished in the time frame presented.

          This victim was not even bright enough to bring a knife to a gun fight. You charge the bull and you get the horns. This was not a dark street in the middle of the night in a shady neighborhood.

          Did they find any Arizona Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail and skittles on him or was he already running off the “lean?” It would explain his mindset of thinking he was faster than a speeding bullet.

          Ignore the comply or die principle at your own peril. But I strongly suspect there is no history of good decision making in this dead man’s history.

          And I’m no boot licker by any stretch.

          1. Did they find any Arizona Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail and skittles on him or was he already running off the “lean?”

            Haha. I’d forgotten about Trayvon being so fucking stupid he thought you could make codeine by mixing those two with OTC cough syrup.

          2. “Comply or die”? WHAT? So either comply and get in Ted Bundy’s car or you die, and how is that Ted Bundy’s fault? He clearly told you to get in the car! It was only when you didn’t that he had to shoot you.

      2. You have no idea what their intentions were. The “suspect”? How in the hell is Arbrey the suspect? The SUSPECTS are the two shitbags who killed him.

  17. I don’t know what happened here, but I know what this incident *isn’t* – it’s not some horrible racist throwback warranting indignant tweets by Presidential candidates and politicians of all stripes.

    Interracial crime happens more than it ought. It only gets publicized if it fits a Narrative.

    1. Even if [which may or may not be true] this case turns out to be an example of “blue privilege,” it will be forced into the “racist white-supremacist america” narrative.

      I hope no white person gets the idea that their color protects them from police abuse – Reason has certainly covered stories which rebut such an assumption.

  18. Since when must we rely on some government employee to show up in time to protect out neighborhoods? Citizens arrest is a long standing concept in our society with roots going all the way back to English common law. A little googling revealed this “victim” was no angel himself and a slow motion viewing of the video reveals he actually made a 90 degree turn around the front of the truck to charge ten or fifteen feet at the man holding the shotgun (which was not pointed at him) when he could have just said “FO” and kept on running (or “jogging” lol!) A struggle ensued (and the shotgun holder almost lost that struggle) until (fortunately for him – or he would be the dead one) he managed to twist it toward his attacker and get a round off. As to the racially motivated punitive arrest of the father/son … well, if there’s no reason to believe they pose a threat to the community at large they shouldn’t be put in a cage pending a grand jury determination and possible adjudication of any charges in court.. We allow our government to put too many people in cages who pose not threat to others.

    1. Missing in your analysis is that these guys never saw him commit a crime, which means citizen’s arrest is out of the question. They thought he kind of looked like a guy they saw on camera, that doesn’t justify the use of deadly force.

      I’m a strong a supporter of self defense rights and the use of deadly force to defend property, but these guys weren’t defending anything as evidenced by the fact that they had to set up a road block away from any property they were defending to stop the guy. This was vigilante justice, and possibly carried out against a totally innocent person who was jogging in a place that happened to have experienced some burglaries recently.

      1. Gregory McMichael was a former policeman and investigator and was quite familiar with Arbery, having been involved with some of his prior cases. Arbery might even have known who the guys were who were pursuing him. Arbery had just set off an alarm on a property. They had been chasing him for a while by the time of the video, with Arbery running down the road and reversing direction several times. At this point Arbery must have become frustrated and he tried to wrestle for a gun, which is definitely not an advisable move. We all know how that went. And Georgia law states if someone tries to grab your firearm from you, you are legally allowed to defend yourself because we all know how that will most likely end if you don’t.

        1. Does Georgia law allow you to start a conflict and then use deadly force to resolve that conflict?

          What he knew about the guy’s past is completely irrelevant, absent witnessing an actual crime you cannot perform a citizen’s arrest, full stop. This guy could’ve been the world’s most prolific and infamous burglar, without witnessing him performing a burglary that day they had no right to try to arrest him.

          Chasing the guy down, blocking his ability to leave peacefully and then saying “well I had no choice but to shoot him, look at how violent he got!” is a seriously chickenshit thing to do.

          1. What do you mean by start a conflict? They heard an alarm going off and saw Arbery, who they recognized from his priors, running away from it. They asked him several times to just stop and wait for police. You are allowed to make a citizens arrest with an active crime like that you know. Quite noble in my opinion. They wanted to ensure justice was served. Unfortunately they were quite caught off guard when Arbery charged him and started wrestling with his shotgun. But note no shots were fired prior to this sudden and unexpected violence.

            1. They asked him several times to just stop and wait for police.

              Did they attempt to block his path or prevent him from leaving?

              1. They didn’t prevent him from leaving. He ran toward the stopped truck. It’s not like they were chasing him down the road. He could have kept on running past them if he wanted to. Or ran In any direction. Or he could have stopped and talked to the men. But he made a different choice. I watched the video in slowmo numerous times. The man open-carrying a shotgun was in the road on the driver side of the truck. The other man was in the bed of the truck. The “victim” ran right past them on the passenger side of the truck. At no point did I see anyone touch him or physically impede his progress, nor did I see any guns pointed at him. He could have sailed right on down the road (with a big “FU whities” if he wanted to) Instead he chose to do a 90 degree left turn in front of the truck after he passed it on the passenger side When he reached the front of the truck he charged ten or fifteen feet toward the man holding the shotgun (in a kind of port-arms manner last I saw him on the video) When the “jogger” charged the shotgun bearer, the man in the bed of the truck yelled at him at him “Watch that. Stop, damn it! Stop!” (this according to the 911 tape. btw … why was he on the phone to 911 if their intent was to murder a “jogger”?) They struggled over the shotgun, at one point it looked like the shotgun bearer was going to lose, but he managed to twist it toward the purported “jogger” and hit him. What was he supposed to do at that point? Let the “jogger” take the shotgun away from him?

                1. On a site called Reason.com someone has managed to reason it out! Bravo sir.

                2. Yes they were chasing him. By their own statements they had previously tried to cut him off and he had reversed course prior to the part that was videotaped. The guy in the truck behind who recorded it was also working with them.

            2. What conflict did these men have with the suspect prior to their decision to chase him down with guns and stop him from jogging?

              Were they defending their own property? Or were they reacting to an alleged property crime on someone else’s property? Any conflict the suspect caused was with the property owner, not random jackoffs who took exception to it.

              And what crime did he commit? Running in a neighborhood where an alarm went off? For all we know that was happenstance, him running and the alarm going off could be entirely unrelated.

              I support one’s right to defend their own property, I don’t think we have a right to chase people down with guns because we think someone may have trespassed on a neighbor’s property. At the point they were interacting with him he was no longer a threat to anyone or their property.

              1. And what crime did he commit? Running in a neighborhood where an alarm went off? For all we know that was happenstance, him running and the alarm going off could be entirely unrelated.

                Apparently there was some security camera footage that did clearly show him walking through a house that was under construction as well as attempting to burglarize another house just prior to the chase. From wikipedia (sorry, Reason won’t let me link for some reason):

                On the afternoon of Arbery’s death, he entered a house under construction, triggering the owner’s security system and recording video. Arbery’s aunt subsequently identified him on the owner’s video, saying that he was “looking, not stealing anything”.[17] However, Waycross District Attorney George Barnhill wrote that there is video of Arbery “burglarizing a home immediately preceding the chase and confrontation”

                None of which is intended to defend the McMichael’s actions. In fact, if anything the fact that they knew his name and had video of him attempting to commit a crime makes their actions even worse as they were completely unnecessary. They could have given his name, description, and the video to the cops and let them handle it.

                While it’s true that these two aren’t cold blooded murderers or racists out hunting blacks for fun or whatever else the media will make them out to be, I wouldn’t consider them heroes either. But that’s just my opinion.

                1. Fair enough, it does seem that he wasn’t just jogging then.

                  Your last 2 paragraphs are spot on. If they knew all of this they didn’t need to stop him since they could just report it, if they didn’t know all of this they had no reason to stop him since they had nothing to tie him to a crime.

                  In general, if you have time to stop what you’re doing, go get a buddy and some guns, and then chase someone down I think you’ve got some explaining to do on why your use of force was justified.

                  Furthermore, and this is more practical than legal advice, if you’re going to pull a gun on someone you need to make sure that you keep them far enough away that they can’t grab it and try to use it against you. You’re putting the other guy in a life or death scenario and he probably isn’t going to like it.

                  1. In general, if you have time to stop what you’re doing, go get a buddy and some guns, and then chase someone down I think you’ve got some explaining to do on why your use of force was justified.

                    Definitely would seem to imply that there’s no immediate threat to you or your property.

                    You’re putting the other guy in a life or death scenario and he probably isn’t going to like it.

                    Yep. And in general it’s probably a bad idea to chase someone down. Once you catch them or they feel they can’t just keep running, they’re not going to react like a rational human being. “Oh well, you caught me! I guess I’ll just calmly wait here for the cops to come arrest my dumb ass.” No, they’re going to react like a cornered wild animal and either fight or flight, and they’ve already tried flight and it didn’t work.

                    1. “Definitely would seem to imply that there’s no immediate threat to you or your property.”

                      Don’t forget that this also happened pretty quickly with Greg McMichael and he didn’t have a lot of time to think it through. He probably thought it would be a quick little adventure and then the cops would be there to take over. These guys don’t have crystal balls, even though he is a very experienced police officer and investigator. Probably running on his police officer instincts more than anything, having only retired months earlier that year.

                    2. the jogger apparently had some splainin to do, so they went up. i don’t think they expected a wild animal response that wild, being accustomed to living in a society. your answer is “get used to it”?

                  2. I generally agree but………………

                    Where I live and, probably lots of you as well, depending on the cops to show up in a timely manner for a report of a burglary, even in progress, is a foolish endeavor. 911 Dispatch will tell you to file a burglary report online.

                    I’ve long wondered why people are so assured that they can call the police and get a response, until they actually do and find out they can’t.

                    Since when do the police have an exclusive on response to any illegal activity.

              2. Any conflict the suspect caused was with the property owner, not random jackoffs who took exception to it.

                Imagine trying to argue this to a jury, especially in south Georgia.

                1. That was more of a moral argument than a legal one. Someone robbing my neighbor is frankly none of my god damned business, certainly not enough of my business to grab some guns and chase someone down over it. These guys wouldn’t be facing murder charges if they had minded their own business.

                  Alternatively, we can all round up posses and get in gunfights every time we witness something that pisses us off, I’m sure that will work out swimmingly.

                  1. Someone robbing my neighbor is frankly none of my god damned business,

                    Good luck with that.

                  2. “Someone robbing my neighbor is frankly none of my god damned business..” Wow, what an upstanding citizen you are. With that attitude, I’m sure your neighborhood wouldn’t soon be plagued with burglaries where no one even bothers to do anything about it.

                2. It’s already been determined that the video of him on a construction site exonerates him, as he neither took anything, nor stayed after being told to leave by the owner.

                  1. yes, he did not stay. The video evidence actually shows him walking slowly up to and into the “construction site” (a fulkly formed house), and ‘when asked to leave’ (meaning he realizes he is being noticed for his bounding architectural curiosity) this is when he turns into the fastest jogger in Georgia. He tears off down the street in a full sprint.

            3. Again with the alarm. I don’t believe there was one. Please provide some evidence.

        2. If he’s that familiar with Arbery, did he identify him by name to any police or dispatcher before chasing Arbery? Or hell, to the guy following behind the both of them videotaping everything?

          I hadn’t read that he did.

          Much easier after seeing him up close, and dying, to make the identification of the deceased as Arbery. But even if he knew the jogger was Arbery, and knew Arbery’s criminal history, how does that give him the probable cause that a crime was committed such that he can try and make a citizen’s arrest of Arbery?

          The father and son didn’t witness any theft that day. Are they saying they witnessed a prior theft on video, recognized Arbery from the video, and then recognized him jogging through the neighborhood that day? Doesn’t the theft have to be near contemporaneous to their attempt to perform a citizen’s arrest?

          1. “But even if he knew the jogger was Arbery, and knew Arbery’s criminal history, how does that give him the probable cause that a crime was committed such that he can try and make a citizen’s arrest of Arbery?”

            Because Arbery had just set off an alarm and was running away from it. That’s pretty suspicious, wouldn’t you say?

            1. Because Arbery had just set off an alarm

              How do you know that?

              1. Because I read the Wikipedia entry called “Shooting of Ahmaud Arbery”

                1. The wikipedia page you cite does not have the word “alarm” on it.

                  Your search – alarm site:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Ahmaud_Arbery – did not match any documents.

                  1. Who knows what the Wikipedia article does or doesn’t have in it; it’s subject to politically motivated edits every few minutes.

            2. Only really really stupid people believe that he “set off an alarm”.
              Dumb ass

          2. “The father and son didn’t witness any theft that day. ”

            The Georgia citizens arrest statute says:

            ARTICLE 4 – ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS
            § 17-4-60 – Grounds for arrest
            O.C.G.A. 17-4-60 (2010)
            17-4-60. Grounds for arrest

            A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

            1. Thank you. Reason should hire your to fact check their articles.

          3. The father and son didn’t witness any theft that day.

            Technically, what they seem to have witnessed was Arbery entering a house in a rather suspicious manner. I don’t know what else went down or whether these people are guilty or not, but “Arbery was just out for a fitness jog when two white supremacists hunted him down and killed him” just doesn’t add up.

      2. “…which means citizen’s arrest is out of the question.”

        Emkay, even if I disregard everything Love to be Wrong provided, certainly there is room for a citizen’s inquiry or does exercising the 2nd preclude exercising the 1st? Dead man escalated it one notch too many.

        1. A citizen’s inquiry doesn’t involve chasing down someone with shotguns in a truck. Get a grip.

  19. Washington D.C. police took until now to arrest someone for a murder committed in January. Wonder what the racism behind that delay was?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/dc-police-arrest-suspect-in-january-killing-in-shaw-neighborhood/2020/05/08/2cefdaf4-911e-11ea-a9c0-73b93422d691_story.html

    1. paywalled, but did they make an arrest only after finding the suspect? Did they have video of the killing clearly identifying him? I mean, is there anything similar to the above case?

      1. In this case the police had no idea where the perp was. Nothing at all in common. It’s amazing the hoops people will jump through to keep their preferred opinion.

        https://patch.com/district-columbia/washingtondc/police-arrest-suspect-2018-fatal-shooting-shaw

    2. i have a relative who was on a murder trial in DC earlier this year. Their biggest observation was what a shit job the DC police had done ‘investigating’ the case. The perp was acquitted.

      1. “Their biggest observation was what a shit job the DC police had done ‘investigating’ the case”

        Seth Rich’s murderers say hi

  20. No matter your opinion of the shooting of Ahmaud Arbery, an arrest and trial is the correct way to go. Hopefully it brings out the relevant and true facts. Just realize, vigilante justice is not recommended in our country, and usually causes the vigilante a lot of trouble.

    1. I would hope that the grand jury looks carefully at the case – indeed, that they look carefully at any case the prosecutor gives them where there’s room for debate. I admit that grand juries don’t always look carefully, often seeming as rubber-stampish as, say, the FISA court. It would be nice if they stopped being intimidated or cajoled into buck-passing the case to a trial (usually meaning forcing a plea-bargain).

      Needless to say, I hope the grand jury would look just as carefully at the case even if the suspect is a “civilian” and not a former cop.

    2. “Hopefully it brings out the relevant and true facts”

      On what planet?

      Our justice system is all about theatrics by lawyers. The best lawyer wins. Often on technicalities.

      “relevant and true facts” are not necessarily part of the equation.

      Have you ever served on a jury?

      1. If you haven’t watched the Aaron Hernandez documentary on Netflix, there’s a really good example.
        Had he had the lawyer he had for his second trial, he’d never have gone to prison for the first.
        Conversely, if he’d had the first lawyer for the second trial, he’d probably have been convicted for both.
        Its rather striking

  21. I’m not interested in the talking points about jogging or racism, but the two men who chased Arbery strike me as law-and-order types who interfered in a situation they shouldn’t have involved themselves in. They weren’t the ones burgled, and even if they were, the most they should have done is follow the guy without stopping him in the middle of the street with weapons. By doing that, they gave him every right to defend himself. If Arbery was the burglar, then he was no longer a threat once he decided to run off, and he was under no obligation to stop and talk to the men who demanded “a moment of his time.” They initiated the situation by forming a roadblock with guns. They interfered when they didn’t need to, because they probably attain their sense of self-worth from playing vigilante. That’s a problem with ex-cops. It’s male Karen disorder.

    1. The prior job history of these men is as irrelevant to this case as the race of the man who was shot.

      1. As well as the victim’s prior criminal record.

      2. It’s relevant if we’re trying to figure out why they took it upon themselves to play vigilante.

      3. Given that politicians are trying to make this case about institutionalized racism and a resurgence of white supremacy, the prior job history and the motivations of these men are very relevant.

        And the fact is that there is not widespread vigilantism against blacks. This is an abuse of power by an ex-cop, that’s all.

  22. I see the usual suspects are racing to be wrong again. At least Reason didn’t use any childhood pictures on this one.

    1. But the HS graduation picture of Arbery that is being used says a lot.

  23. Can’t wait till people make TJ’s argument about this guy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kHMOXNsE2k

  24. It was an ex cop that’s why. If an armed man shot an ex cop they would have made the arrest right away. The gang that wears blue.

    1. The cops didn’t make the call to not arrest.

  25. The video won’t play, and I’m assuming that it’s being taken down. So I might be missing some context.

    To claim self defense, your life should be in legitimate danger. Or your perception of the situation has to be correct. Georgia is an open carry state. If someone was “chasing” me with a gun and said “hold up, let me ask you a question”, (for example) I don’t have to answer him. But it doesn’t necessarily mean I feel threatened to the point of approaching him and trying to disarm him.

    I was chased by an overzealous security guard last week at an empty parking lot. He sped almost right next to me and said “You can’t be here”. Because he was driving an unmarked white car, I had no idea who was coming after me until he spoke to me through the open window. My first reaction was to walk slowly away from the car.

    What if Arbery confronted the truck to argue with the driver, reached for his gun and a scuffle ensued? Is it murder? Maybe an act self defense, accident or maybe manslaughter? I hear a second car herded him towards a waiting car, and a more in depth video might show what really happened.

    1. If two guys with guns come up to you and ask to talk, you have every right to feel threatened. Frankly, the two men put themselves into a situation they didn’t need to be involved in. They were busybodies who interfered in a situation where their “assistance” was not needed.

      1. If two guys with guns come up to you and ask to talk, you have every right to feel threatened.

        But if you try to grab their guns, you are the attacker, not they.

        In any case, the details of this are for the grand jury to decide, and possibly a criminal jury.

        What is clear is that the media narrative of “a black kid was out for a jog when two white supremacists hunted him down and killed him” is wrong.

        1. Nonsense. The person who pulls the weapon is the aggressor. If a rapist comes up to you with a gun and you resist by trying to take it away from him, how can he claim self defense? “Had the bitch not tried to fight me and just done what I said, she’d be alive! ”
          Serial killers logic.

  26. My libertarian instincts say that this is a case of the good ol’ boy network protecting their own. But…. I was burned by jumping to conclusions about Trayvon and Michael Brown. The media dropped the ball (and not quite unintentionally, btw) on those two incidents.

    Despite my inclinations, there are things that are giving me the Peter tingle:
    * Nice clean-cut pictures of Ahmaud, rough pictures of the two rednecks. Maybe those are accurate depictions, but we’ve been misled by that before.
    * Mention of rummaging around the construction site has been sparse until recently.
    * One news story (Newsweek?) referred to Ahmaud as going on his usual jog. I’m sorry, but if he regularly jogged in the neighborhood, he would not have been given second notice. (Yes, it should go without saying that you have a right to jog on a street you hadn’t jogged on before.)
    * Maybe he was an avid jogger, but his family and their lawyers sure are stressing that a lot.
    * News stories are including lots of quotes from the family lawyers, presented as fact.
    * I’m still curious about the cameraman. Is there more to hear from him?

    Before your knee jerks, these are not reasons to take one side or another. Just things that make me want to wait.

    Amash says Amhaud was gunned down, but struggling over a shotgun doesn’t quite fit the description of gunned down. Gunned down was Ruby Ridge. Amhaud was chased down, but not gunned down.

    There may be nothing to any of these tingles, but I’m not taking a side yet — not that my taking a side matters. Unlike officials in Glynn, I can afford to wait.

    In any case, I’m curious what charge they’re going for. From my limited legal understanding, for it to be murder, they have to prove that the two rednecks hopped in their truck and chased him down with the *intent* to kill him. THAT charge probably won’t stick.

    Unfortunately the news media won’t make that distinction and educate anybody about what a murder charge is. So, if they’re not charged with murder, look for the AOC types to go full retard with their justice demands.

    Before you signal your virtue, just be prepared for the possibility that what happened isn’t exactly what is being reported just yet.

    1. Murder will stick if it is shown that MacMichael pointed the gun at him and pulled the trigger. The intent doesn’t have to go back far. A mere second or two is all it takes. OTOH, The shooter will probably claim that Arbrey – during the scuffle – hit his hand while on the trigger and caused the discharge.

      Not familiar with Felony Murder in Georgia, but it is possible that it would stick in this case. The MacMichaels could be shown to have unlawfully detained Arbrey when they (in combination) yelled at him to stop, and then proceeded to block his path with their truck and exiting said truck brandishing a shot gun, all without probable cause.

      The story about “burglarizing” the house under construction won’t pass. At worst , it was a trespass, which is a misdemeanor, and was not committed in presence of nor witnessed by the MacMichaels.

      1. The outcome depends on the details, and we don’t know them.

        What is crystal clear that trying to use this as an example of widespread white-on-black violence is absurd; white-on-black violence is rare compared to the reverse.

      2. They are being charged with Felony Murder. The basic definition of someone dying as the immediate consequence of a crime being committed makes anyone who took part in that crime guilty of felony murder. Even if Arbery died of a heart attack. Even if the son missed and shot his own father, HE’D be guilty of Felony Murder. Had Arbery defended himself, and managed to shoot the dad, killing him, SON could be charged with felony murder since he took part in the crime.

    2. * Mention of rummaging around the construction site has been sparse until recently.

      Looks like a nearly finished house on the pictures.

      * Maybe he was an avid jogger, but his family and their lawyers sure are stressing that a lot.

      Maybe that’s what he told his family, but there is surveillance video out now, and it doesn’t fit the description of a kid just jogging for sports.

      I have no opinion on guilt or innocence (the video is too grainy), but the media are clearly misrepresenting this case and reaching a politically motivated conclusion.

      1. The surveillance video shows him doing nothing wrong. He walks into a house under construction. He leaves and takes nothing. Not a crime, not even a misdemeanor. Unless you live in North Korea.

        1. he walks in, carefully checking his surroundings before entering and leaves in a full on sprint, tearing off down the street, lol…

          is this how you usually leave places after you are done checking them out? Just in a full on dead run? wtf? lol..

          also we don’t know what the video in the house shows, they have shown a 5 second loop they have repeated over and over again, and yet he was in the house for 3-4 minutes.

  27. Bah, that video doesn’t show the most important bits. In any event, nobody here knows the full context of this shooting. Based on what I saw, it’s not likely to be murder.

    The bigger problem is that nobody trusts the cops to properly investigate, and especially when a cop or ex-cop in involved.

  28. I know I always carry a hammer when I’m jogging in my timberland boots.

  29. Burglars get shot all the time. So what. He assaulted a guy with a shotgun? How did that work out?

    1. Yeah. Just walked right up to a guy minding his own business and relaxing on his lawn with a shotgun like he usually does and tries to take it away from him. Jesus Christ, the dumbass excuses here.

      1. “Out jogging” is the biggest dumbass excuse.

  30. Send em all back to Leftardia.

  31. The only things missing are the white hoods and rope.

    1. Yeah, you’ve swallowed the party line hook line and sinker. This was an ex-cop acting as if he were still a cop and then using his connections to cover it up. It’s reprehensible and hopefully the courts will get to the bottom of this.

      When it comes to interracial crime, a black men kill white men at 10x the rate as white men kill black men, so the idea that we have some kind of massive problem with “white hoods” is absurd.

      1. And black men routinely get away with it too! Their buddies in the criminal justice system get them off all the time. That’s why there’s so few of them in prison.

  32. I’m waiting for the outcome of the trial. You can’t trust the media’s reporting and there seems to be some discrepancies. The victim may not be as clean as they are portraying him. The shooters may not be card carrying klan. Let’s wait and see.

  33. A lot left to be determined, but it’s probably one of those situations where everyone involved was wrong/dumb.
    I dont think it was motivated by racism. Prejudice, possibly, but probsbly not racial animus

    1. Racism, for sure.

      Blue supremacy.

      1. More like an arrogance which racism only partially covers.

  34. “jogger” is wearing a belt. “jogger” seems to be wearing timberland boots. “jogger” seems to be wearing long saggy khaki shorts.

    Does nobody remember being a kid, or has nobody watched cops? You don’t have to run right on the road if you are running away from people. Most people actually attempting to get away from people in cars would go where cars can’t go, you know, between the houses, over the gates, etc..

    When we you are kids you run in all directions playing tag, hide and go seek. If he were truly scared for his life he could take a b-line away from the road at any time, he is not confined to the road. Why is this never mentioned? He does not really seem to be trying to get away that much. I am not sure how afraid he is. Not that he has to be, but anyway, the point is the story does not make sense.

    Also there seems to be hammer laying on the ground at about 16 seconds into the video. Is this something he dropped that maybe he pilfered from the construction site? Odd that a construction hammer would be laying right in the road where he just ran past.

  35. Trayvon Martin was shot after he jumped and started beating Zimmerman. The editor evidently was unfamiliar with the actual facts of why Zimmerman was found not guilty…

    1. But the (alleged) editor is fully familiar with the socialist party line.

  36. does anybody really think sambo was jogging in a place where he didn’t live? how did he get there? jog 3 miles to get to that sub division? next white hating communist media will say he was jogging to medical school 20 miles away. not excusing the idiots that chased him

  37. Of course, the difference between Ahmaud Arbery and Trayvon Martin is that Arbery was running down the street, minding his own business when he was confronted by the McMichaels. Martin hid from Zimmerman and attacked him when Zimmerman located him. (There is no evidence to contradict Zimmerman’s version of events.) Apples and oranges.

  38. There is some more information on the DA’s reasoning. The following explains that reasoning-
    https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/6916-george-barnhill-letter-to-glyn/b52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf

    These days, pretty much every news source seems to present these incidents in ways that advance whatever their political agenda is. The first time I saw this story, I had exactly the intended reaction, which was outrage that two rednecks had chased down and killed a jogger, probably because of racism. There is a good chance that is still the case. But it is complicated.

    If the link does not work, a critical part of it is the phrase “Arberys mental health records & prior convictions help explain his apparent aggressive nature and his possible thought pattern to attack an armed man.”

    1. That DA had no possible reason to shill for his former buddies, did he.

  39. I’ll wait for the facts to come out. That said I often run and can’t tell you how many times assholes in cars (I hate t say this but it is usually men in pickups and women in SUVs) driver very aggressively cause I run on the side of the road (softer than sidewalks)..been spit on, soft drinks thrown at me, yelled at to get out of the roads, and the best..some woke in a minivan threatened to all the cops because I was running on a public road (had a Hillary bumper sticker and a “Diversity” one as well).

    AT the very least these two men showed bad judgment even if one was formally a cop.

  40. This case is more about the abuse of power by ex-police than about anything race related.

  41. Now consider the mindset of those involved.

    McMichael recently had his gun stolen from his truck. For all those, “they should have just called the police” people, he did. They dropped by a few days after and filled out a report so he could file it with his insurance.
    That’s what police do with reports of minor burglary or trespass.

    They don’t come screaming up in lights blazing and sirens howling to check out the suspicious guy setting off alarms in construction sites.

    McMichael also had previously investigated Arbery for violating probation he was on for bringing a handgun to a high school basketball game, and I believe assaulting a police officer. He was also said to have mental health problems. As a DA investigator, McMichael was probably aware of this. Arbery’s brother is currently in prison for a felony, as is his cousin.
    None of this means Arbery was guilty, but this would have been on McMichael’s mind as he began his pursuit, a convicted criminal with a history of gun violence, theft and attacking police, from a criminal family running away from a construction site.

    Was it reasonable, based on his knowledge to be armed? With Arbery’s history? Yeah.

    I don’t know how it is outside of fly-over country, but when a crime is being committed or assumed to be committed in a neighborhood, people take action. If a house is on fire, people down south don’t just call the fire department, they try to help put it out. Same principle applies to crime. They don’t just sit back and call 911. They will do it for a white teen, a hispanic woman or a black man.

    So let’s summarize;
    A former LE officer, sees a convicted felon, known to carry a handgun in the past running from a crime scene, he grabs his son and his gun and jumps in the truck.

    As opposed to “2 rednecks see a black man jogging and decide go hunt him down and kill him because like all southern white males, they are racists.”

Please to post comments