Georgia 'LYNCHING' citizen fatally shoots unarmed black man ... Video Emerges, Grand Jury to Convene



The fatal shooting of Ahmaud Arbery -- a 25-year-old black man out for a jog when he was chased and killed -- was caught on video, prompting a call for a grand jury to review the case.

Arbery's death is being referred to as a modern-day lynching, as he was unarmed when he was gunned down in Brunswick, GA on February 23 by a white citizen named Travis McMichael ... who has not been arrested or charged. He also happens to be the son of a former district attorney investigator.

As you can see in the video, Arbery was jogging when he was stopped by McMichael and his father in a white pickup truck. McMichael was armed with a shotgun. Arbery appears to attempt to run around the truck before he and McMichael start grappling.

After at least 2 shots, the men continued struggling over the gun ... until Arbery stumbles away, shot in the mid-section, and then collapses to the ground. He was later pronounced dead.
94a5b7dd35e448f585d3b6ecf3e83e3e_md.jpg


McMichael has not been charged in the shooting ... reportedly because he and his father, who was in the back of the truck, claim they were trying to make a citizen's arrest. They claim Ahmaud fit the description of a suspect in a string of recent break-ins in the area.

After the emergence of the video, D.A. Pro Tempore Tom Durden has decided the case "should be presented to the grand jury of Glynn County for consideration of criminal charges against those involved in the death of Mr. Arbery.”

Ahmaud's family says the use of deadly force was unnecessary.

Here's the statement from the district attorney who was brought in to oversee the case and decide how and whether the case should be prosecuted.
EXRhs2vXkAINOAA.jpg


Attorney Lee Merritt, who represents Arberys mother, claims "The series of events captured in this video confirm what all the evidence indicated prior to its release— Ahmaud Arbery was pursued by three white men that targeted him solely because of his race and murdered him..."


EXRmSCPXsAYkx0v.jpg


==============

Imagine being hunted by two fat hillbillies in a truck.
 
Last edited:
Under the law at the time they had the right to affect a citizen's arrest.
Nope. Under the law at the time they needed to have evidence he was committing a crime, had committed a crime, or witnessed the crime. They met exactly zero of those standards by their own testimony. Suspicion of criminal activity doesn’t allow you to attempt to restrain someone. They didn’t see him take anything, and they didn’t even see him trespass.
 
They didn’t think that they had committed murder. They took the video because they intended to make a lawful citizen’s arrest. And nothing in the video was really indispute as much as the circumstances preceding the incident.

They caught a serial petty thief casing the neighborhood and in typical Ahmaud Arbury fashion, he reacted stupidly and impulsively to being confronted. It was not his first time.

The guy who took the video is going to prison for life.
Except none of that is actually true lol, they didn’t have the grounds for a citizens arrest and someone died. Intention or not, that makes it felony murder, as they killed someone in the commission of a felony.
 
I wouldn't make that call yet, Fenty may very well get more cops off the street.
 

Hey look, the citizens arrest law was updated shortly after this incident was brought to national attention (after the case had been closed). I wonder what the previous law said? Well this is a choice quote from the article I linked:
"HB 479 will repeal the portion of the law that allows a private person to arrest someone if that person witnessed, or was told about, a crime, or if someone suspected of committing a felony is trying to escape."
 
They didn’t think that they had committed murder. They took the video because they intended to make a lawful citizen’s arrest. And nothing in the video was really indispute as much as the circumstances preceding the incident.

They caught a serial petty thief casing the neighborhood and in typical Ahmaud Arbury fashion, he reacted stupidly and impulsively to being confronted. It was not his first time.

The guy who took the video is going to prison for life.
I won't argue your interpretation of events, but I do have a question for you:

If someone in your neighborhood was suspected of theft (you hadn't seen him actually steal anything), would you think pursuing him in a vehicle and cornering him would be justified when you have ample footage to turn over to the police who could easily enough question the man?

Conversely, if a few people mistook your identify and were convinced you were in fact guilty of a crime, do you think they are lawfully entitled to arrest you on mere suspicion and rob you of liberty?
 
Odds of appeal having a chance? Near 1 in a million. Because the Murder happened after the felony (Felony Murder) any appeal can only address the felonies that happened that preceded the murder in order to invalidate the Felony Murder.

So the false arrest, pursuit and detention etc. etc. would all have to be overturned on appeal for them to then say the Felony Murder isn't applicable.

They are fucked. You'll see R. Kelly winning before these guys do.

Screen Shot 2022-01-07 at 9.06.11 PM.png
 
Here is what Bill Palmer’s aka the king of left wing info wars better know as the Palter report reaction to it View attachment 2868250
and if one looks into him here is what the guy looks like and the images show the face of a man who is unhimged and have a undiagnosed mental disorder View attachment 2868253View attachment 2868254View attachment 2868255View attachment 2868256
ad hominem much?

The argument for them not being guilty is they were performing a lawful citizens arrest and/were doing what they were told to do by the police. Also they were protecting their neighborhood. The McMichaels were then justified in shooting the man that attacked them while performing a lawful citizens arrest.

(I'm ignoring all the fuck shit the judge did with the jury instructions because ultimately those boys were going to jail no matter what and did it to themselves by elder McMichael leaking the video because he got upset what people were saying on Twitter)

I do not agree with this argument primarily because the McMichaels don't agree with this argument and in their opening statement their lawyer said they had no reason to perform said citizens arrest which kinda makes that lawful citizens arrest a kidnapping.

Anyway, I feel bad the last guy. He got life with parole for recording something. He also could have had a deal that his lawyer didn't notify him of(so I heard). That sucks major balls and he's going to state with the rest of them. Odds on them lasting a month?

Edit: If Arbury had taken the gun and shot all of them he would have been justified. If the McMichaels weren't idiots they could have a more convincing argument for why they were justified.
i was with you right up to the edit.

How did the guy who filmed the murder but never participated get a life sentence? That sets a pretty terrifying precedent.
a life sentence does seem steep, but i'm confident that he will fare far better in his appeal than the mcmichaels will.
if not, that will set a terrifying precedent.

And this is why people don't like you.
And this is why people don't like you.
"people"? or just you when you disagree?
 
Last edited:
No no, it's correct. Liberals by definition are not people.

I want to say there is a Q&A topic about this.
 
ad hominem much?


i was with you right up to the edit.


a life sentence does seem steep, but i'm confident that he will fare far better in his appeal than the mcmicheals will.
if not, that will set a terrifying precedent.



"people"? or just you when you disagree?
You raise an interesting point about Bryan - and his odds of appeal.

But I am still trying to get around how an appeal would have legs in this matter. For an appeal to work (beyond proving an unfair trial which would be what all 3 would then benefit from), they have to show Bryan's actions are entirely independent of the other 2 and that they were not acting jointly and that the prosecution incorrectly jointly tried him to the other defendants actions prior to the killing.

I do not see how an argument can be formulated to do this, but if there is one, I'd like to hear someone chime in with an argument that would at least give some pause for thought.
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: Leslie Nielsen
Back