Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The killing of Ahmaud Arbery (23rd February 2020)
- Thread starter BobbyManc
- Start date
Just another day in God's own country.
"Moments later, after a struggle over the shotgun"
Am I the only one who doesn't want to take the pitchforks out (in either direction) before knowing what in these moments happened? Waiting for the full story and all, you know.
That's a great way to make it sound like it was in self-defence. But what preceded it was that they wanted to live out their vigilante fantasy.
And you know that exactly how? Proof? Or do we go back to witchhunting, because of gossip? A fundamental pillar of democracy is innocent until proven guilty. If you do not understand why it is important, you really should get a grasp on matters.
Normal people call the police when they see a suspect. They don't arm themselves, chase the person down, accost and murder them. This is a really surprising verdict because if the guy had been in their home not even castle law would protect them based on what they did.
One of the men was an ex-cop that’s the reason nobody charged yet
Sounds like the Trayvon Martin case.
Here's a link for those who don't want to sign up for the failing NYT.
https://newsone.com/3933484/citizens-arrest-law-defend-white-man-accused-of-killing-ahmaud-arbery/
This quote from an Atlanta lawyer sums it up for me:
https://newsone.com/3933484/citizens-arrest-law-defend-white-man-accused-of-killing-ahmaud-arbery/
This quote from an Atlanta lawyer sums it up for me:
You may be right I’ve only seen the tweet above, but the details seem very similar?
Both victims essentially followed as “suspects” solely due to the colour of their skin, and the ones with the guns being the ones to instigate both incidents, but being found innocent because they were “defending themselves” from the black guy they had chased down and attacked whilst armed
Zimmerman was even on the phone to 911 who told him to stand down and stop pursuing Martin.
I’m sure if the poor bloke out for a jog in this case had pulled out a licenced firearm and shot the two rednecks who chased him down in their truck and angrily confronted him with shotguns he’d have been treated exactly the same, having lawfully stood his ground.
psssst Trump ya Cheeto wanker, that was sarcasm.
They're very similar. What makes this one worse for me is that these two guys went into their home, armed themselves and then chased the victim down. Zimmerman was at least an appointed head of a neighbourhood watch group and had been driving about on personal business when he happened upon Martin. He called in to report the suspicious behaviour as he had multiple times. It's debateable what Zimmerman's intent was when following Martin, less so in this case.
Crazy, didn't he basically say that he'd had enough of these people and went after Trayvon? How he was acquitted I'll never know. Man with gun followed unarmed man after telling authorities he was taking justice in to his own hands. Unarmed man dead, armed man acquitted because he was getting his ass kicked by the kid. fecked up.
His priors and his run ins with the law after ends the debate of his intentions. The guy was a cowardly cnut that shot a kid for no fecking reason other than he was a cowardly cnut.
The article is quoting the police report, as far as I can see. So the same article as you. The difference is you seem inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the fella who saw someone out for a jog who he thought looked familiar. He then proceeded to call his son, they armed themselves and started chasing him. Finally the unarmed guy they armed themselves to chase wound up shot dead. I give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who was out jogging. Vigilante justice is not part of democracy where I'm from.
Totally agree with you. America land of the free, home of the brave.... Only if you're a white person.
To be fair, Zimmerman had a concealed carry permit. Martin would have had no idea that he was armed when their fight started. At that point, the scales of justice go to Zimmerman. It's difficult to say what his intent was. He may have followed Martin in order to help police apprehend him and armed himself in case he needed to defend his life. Alternatively, he may have set out to apprehend or attack Martin. Sadly, we'll never know.
I'm not aware of any priors with respect to Zimmerman. Indeed, past convictions would make it hard to be a CCW holder in any state that uses such a permit system and federally, most convicted felons can't possess firearms. Anything after the incident is irrelevant as stress will be a signifcant factor. Someone tried to murder him FFS.
The cowardly cnut bit is opinion, not a fact. Zimmerman was a CCW holder who was getting his ass kicked (why he was is almost irrelevant legally). As noted, that means his actions in that moment were within the law. I don't condone what he did leading up to that but the altercation is the key factor in his acquittal.
So, as mentioned, while the two cases have similarities, this one in Georgia is worse because of the active decision to leave their property when they were not in any danger or witnessing a crime or potential crime; the relatively un-concealability of a shotgun, making any altercation a threatening one and the fact that it happened in broad daylight, which should lessen the suspicion of burglary.
FYI this is the text of the code in Georgia that allows Citizen's arrest:
As far as I can tell, none of this applies (it doesn;t say anything about shooting suspects, either). We'll see what the alleged video evidence has to say. Hopefully these two guys are convicted.
Thank you for the info. I think the best outcome from that incident would have been for Trayvon to give Zimmerman permanent brain damage with an almighty beating and then went home to enjoy his candy. It's people like Zimmerman that make me hate this country, they all think they are hard stuff till they get a right hook in the jaw.
So many factors contributed to what happened in these two cases. Burglaries, B&Es etc are difficult for the police to solve, let alone apprehend someone in the commission of one. This leads regular people to become frustrated and desire to take matters into their own hands (imo they should just leave this stuff to law enforcement, take it on the chin if they are victimized and make sure they have an effective insurance policy that isn't a gun). Finally, people's propensity to engage in aggressive and/or violent behaviour puts them into situations that are unlikely to have positive outcomes (many state laws contribute to this by removing the notion of duty to retreat and enabling people to defend themselves from perceived threats to their safety).
The fact that these latest two guys will likely have their lives ruined by the court case, media exposure and costs is a small comfort and insufficient, imo.
Disgusting how the preosecutor keeps referring to the guy's criminal past like that has anything to do with what happened.
And that same article also says:
"But others contend that Mr. Arbery was up to no good. On the day of the shooting, and apparently moments before the chase, a neighbor in Satilla Shores called 911, telling the dispatcher that a black man in a white T-shirt was inside a house that was under construction and only partially closed in.
“And he’s running right now,” the man told the dispatcher. “There he goes right now!” "
And:
"Mr. Barnhill also wrote that he did not believe there was evidence of a crime, noting that Gregory McMichael and his son had been legally carrying their weapons under Georgia law. And because Mr. Arbery was a “burglary suspect,” the pursuers, who had “solid firsthand probable cause,” were justified in chasing him under the state’s citizen’s arrest law."
And:
"In a separate document, Mr. Barnhill stated that video exists of Mr. Arbery “burglarizing a home immediately preceding the chase and confrontation.” In the letter to the police, he cites a separate video of the shooting filmed by a third pursuer. The video shows Mr. Arbery trying to grab the shotgun from Travis McMichael’s hands, Mr. Barnhill wrote."
So how about you stop cherry-picking and simply wait for how the case develops? Again, what happened between the two guys moving there for what I would assume neighborhood watch and the guy being shot is what is key. And apparently it is at least partially videotaped - so there is a pretty good chance a neutral court can figure out what happened rather than us just going off of limited information and simply assuming things. Or we can take the pitchforks out and just go on a witchhunt like a horde of dumb and uncivilised orcs.
A bit like those two wannabe cops in Georgia?
There are about a bazillion reasons depending on context why they would do that. Context matters.A bit like those two wannabe cops in Georgia?
And even if it was a dumb move to start with - that is pretty seperate from the killing being legally justified or not - except of course they did go out to just shoot some black guys. Then they deserve all the punishment in the world.
But we simply do NOT know that. So we have to wait for further investigation and what a neutral court decides. And just because someone potentially does something dumb doesn't mean further dumb actions are justified. That's a childs argumentation.
Which is exactly why I am saying we need to know what happened in those moments of them going there to the point where the guy was shot. We do not. Apparently there is at least partial video-evidence. Thus I am saying to wait out what comes from it rather than saying "this must have happend" or "this is surely racially motivated" or whatever. We simply do not know. Neither you, I nor anyone in this thread. So all we can do is to wait until investigation is done and/or a neutral court decided in this case.
I admit I don't know anything about the civil arrest laws of Georgia. I assumed it wasn't alright to gun a suspect down.
That kinda goes back to the original tweet's point though. What the heck is up with the law if it's OK for two civilians to kill a third civilian they suspect has burgled a house? Even if they knew he had done it would it not be a bit better to call the police and follow him till they arrive at the scene?
It's like they're clinging on to the wild west as much as they can.
I'm going to say that there is racial motivation here. A black man in a white t-shirt could be a lot of people.
Did they set out to shoot him because they hate blacks. Probably not.
Did they profile him based on race? Yes, this is very likely. Recall, a black man in a white t-shirt could be a lot of people. It's hardly a description at all (and where did they get that description from anyway?)
Did the fact that two armed white men in a truck pulled up to a black guy going for a jog through their neighbourhood create a situation where the black guy had only one option (i.e. fight for his life). Absolutely.
Were they justified in brandishing arms against someone who, by virtue of wearing shots and a t-shirt, probably was clearly not armed? I'm not so sure and it may be this piece that convicts them.
Anyway, we won't see any murder charge on this but hopefully something. Manslaughter or negligent homicide. People who undertake this sort of justice need to be made example of. I guarantee they had no immediate knowledge or "probable firsthand cause" to believe Mr. Arbery committed any crime. They are hedging on the 911 call coming in around that time to get them off.
Yes. It's the foundation of law that justice is blind. He's a cnut.
I am not from the US, so I don't know the exact law. And I doubt most americans know the exact laws, either. Which is why professionals need to take this case on.
But I can see the size of the village on wikipedia (~16.000 people on 370 km². My village is a bit bigger at 55km² and has no cops here at all. We had people just walk into houses on broad daylight and empty them and when police came they were long gone). It could very well be this area has little to no cops so it is necessary for them to do go out and take matters into their own hands. It could also be that the previous robber was known to be armed. It could be that these people are just complete scum. There could be many reasons for this. Some could make this situation justifiable. Others could make it murder.
My point is to speak out against making up opinions on the matter before knowing the exact case, because it is a dangerous attitude and could very well lead to vigilantism and worse. And naturally it could be these two dudes did exactly that - but we simply have to wait for the facts.
We know there was a robber around. Considering the village has ~60% black population there is a pretty good chance the assumed robber was also black. So when someone potentially or perceivedly (rightfully or not) does something shady when there are robbings happening and the suspect is said to be black - then yes, this is perfectly justifiable profiling.
This is an example of what could have made them look at the death guy. I don't say it is that case or not. I am saying we DO NOT KNOW. And there is no public evidence for us to make an opinion in one way or another. Just an article that is baiting on an emotional response - like pretty much all media from all political sides is doing right now.
And I say it again. Context matters. The very same action can be good or bad depending on the circumstances. And so far we do not know these circumstances.
And he was specifically told to stay in his SUV and not follow Martin, which he ignored. There is no doubt in my mind Zimmerman wanted to shoot someone. Otherwise he would have stayed in his vehicle as instructed.
I disagree. Armed vigilantism for burglary is an over-response. Outside of your own dwelling, it's not a life or death situation. The two accused men turned it into one with their actions. That could turn out badly for them.
Right now we don't know what they knew about the suspect. Only that there is a concurrent call to 911. How did they know these details? It makes that element suspicious to me. That's something a lawyer could find out and release to the press to mitgate his client's circumstances.
Video of the killing released
Here's the video of his final moments
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
911 call:
https://www.news4jax.com/news/georg...erges-of-fatal-shooting-of-unarmed-black-man/
How can somebody just do this? I honestly can't get my head around it. They haven't even been arrested yet?
That’s fecking shocking!
America’s such a fecked up place. Someone tweeted in the comments their address’s though so hopefully someone out there takes care of these scumbags!
Last edited:
Horrible country....I would be on my way out if things hadn't gone tits up these last few months.
The person filming is allegedly the third person involved in the shooting. The two in the truck called him (friend of the family) before the chase started and they've basically got Ahmaud surrounded on both sides. The camera dipping is when the person filming is loading their own gun.That’s fecking shocking!
Two District Attorneys have had to recuse themselves because they've had conflicts of interest in the case.
That so called prosecutor basically wrote a letter in full defence of the three: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...-glyn/b52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf
If I was that poor man's father/brother I would probably be the only person going to jail.That’s fecking shocking!
He ie charging at the shooter, isn't he? So again what I said the other day. It's important to figure out what happened that made this situation escalate.
Does need to be made clear, but by the offenders' own series of events Ahmaoud didn't begin his run to chase these guys down. They chased him and tried to stop him when he charged at one of them, more than likely to avoid being shot or at the response of being called a n.... no doubt.
Judging by Ahmaoud's clothing he was clearly not carrying any form of weapons, or at least large weapons. EVEN if he had a small handgun or knife, unlikely, what would you do when approached aggressively by heavily armed militia?