Ahmaud Arbery Shooting

[Core781]

You need to take it up with:

The vigilante posse became a separate matter when Arbery closed and attacked the armed men. The only laws that matter are the stand your ground/self preservation laws in the case of the murder charge. People seem to get lost in the minutia. When he attacked the armed man on the street Arbery showed means and intent. And they both had the right to stop him from disarming the son who was attacked.


The family definitely has a civil case. But if they prove he was stealing not so much.

[jsbhike]

If unarmed Im taking cover and running away. Ranger 101. Never attempt to fight a battle you know you cant win.

You mean like running down the side of the truck Travis McMichael wasn't standing on?

[WillBrink]

The vigilante posse became a separate matter when Arbery closed and attacked the armed men. The only laws that matter are the stand your ground/self preservation laws in the case of the murder charge. People seem to get lost in the minutia. When he attacked the armed man on the street Arbery showed means and intent. And they both had the right to stop him from disarming the son who was attacked.


The family definitely has a civil case. But if they prove he was stealing not so much.

Why? If they had no legal Rights (and that's a Q we are still unclear on) to confront him as they did, then that has to be a factor as to the legality of what followed. Would that not be part of the overall equation? Arbery would have had no one to get into a tussle over the gun had they not tracked him down, so I'd think the legality of that needs to be established which brings us to the resulting event that follows.

[jsbhike]

The vigilante posse became a separate matter when Arbery closed and attacked the armed men. The only laws that matter are the stand your ground/self preservation laws in the case of the murder charge. People seem to get lost in the minutia. When he attacked the armed man on the street Arbery showed means and intent. And they both had the right to stop him from disarming the son who was attacked.


The family definitely has a civil case. But if they prove he was stealing not so much.

So the McMichaels were attempting to illegally detain Arbery and Arbery wasn't supposed to prevent that?

Interesting take on it.

[WillBrink]

If unarmed Im taking cover and running away. Ranger 101. Never attempt to fight a battle you know you cant win.

Should that not read something like "Never attempt to fight a battle you know you cant win if you can avoid it, otherwise, take as many of the M-fers with you as you can" ?

Rangers have taken on many a fight with low odds of success and either died trying or won the day.

Maybe Arbery felt that was the only choice open to him in that moment.

[Averageman]

Should that not read something like "Never attempt to fight a battle you know you cant win if you can avoid it, otherwise, take as many of the M-fers with you as you can" ?

Rangers have taken on many a fight with low odds of success and either died trying or won the day.

Maybe Arbery felt that was the only choice open to him in that moment.

If I'm jogging along and suddenly I find myself being followed by a truck full of armed and angry men, I'm going to avoid confrontation at all costs. Having said that, at some point, they're in a truck and I'm on foot. Eventually I'm going to get tired of running for possibly my life.
I'm going to figure out a way to go someplace that truck is unlikely to go, like cutting between houses or even trying to get some help from someone on the street, or even gaining some space and banging on a door.
Things go sideways though and if the event gains momentum by having someone jump from a truck with a shotgun and they make threats, what is there left to do?

All of that aside, how much of someone else's property was he running off with? It's pretty obvious what someone running in shorts and a T-Shirt is carrying. These guys knew he had nothing in his hands or it's very likely these two Muppets wouldn't have confronted him.
Just saying, If you are following me, if I see you have a gun while you are following me, if I feel that my life is in danger and you've pulled a gun on me, am I not in fact in danger for my life?
All of this, "he grabbed the gun" stuff holds weight only if there were no previous threatening acts by the armed party.

[WillBrink]

Update, there's now vid of Arbery inside the construction site looking around. It does not appear that he took anything. He may have just been curious and wanted to take a look, or he was casing the place, unknown at this time. It does however demonstrates they didn't just randomly target a black man who happened to be jogging through their neighborhood. That much of their version of the event holds water at least. I'm less suspicious of their motivation for approaching him, but I'm unclear of the legality of doing so under those circumstances. The vid does show him taking anything (there may be more vid of course), so other than trespassing, Arbery broke no laws.

There's also consistent comments about Arbery having a hammer on him, but I don't see any evidence of that so far.

[ruckusjuice]

The video shows that the McMichael armed with the shotgun closed the distance with Arbery to intercept him when Arbery tried to run along the passenger side of the truck. That, along with some of the other factors already mentioned, make it tough to argue that Arbery was the aggressor when he grabbed McMichael’s shotgun.

Trespassing on the construction site, which is the only thing it seems Arbery actually did wrong, is a misdemeanor in GA. The McMichaels and their buddy who filmed the cell phone video chased Arbery down in vehicles and attempted to detain him at gunpoint over a non-violent misdemeanor. I hope that the members here would never do anything that stupid. I’m betting that the possibility that Arbery wouldn’t immediately comply with the McMichaels’ commands didn’t even enter their minds. When he didn’t do exactly what they told him, they weren’t prepared and they panicked, leading to the younger McMichael attempting to intercept Arbery when Arbery tried to run around the truck instead of stopping.

It will be up to the courts to determine whether the McMichaels has reasonable grounds to attempt a citizens arrest of Arbery. They’ll have evidence we don’t have access to at this time when making that determination. Until then, all we can really do is guess based on partial information. Sure makes you think about what you would do if a bunch of guys in a truck pulled up and tried to detain you at gunpoint.

[kwelz]

Update, there's now vid of Arbery inside the construction site looking around. It does not appear that he took anything. He may have just been curious and wanted to take a look, or he was casing the place, unknown at this time. It does however demonstrates they didn't just randomly target a black man who happened to be jogging through their neighborhood. That much of their version of the event holds water at least. I'm less suspicious of their motivation for approaching him, but I'm unclear of the legality of doing so under those circumstances. The vid does show him taking anything (there may be more vid of course), so other than trespassing, Arbery broke no laws.

There's also consistent comments about Arbery having a hammer on him, but I don't see any evidence of that so far.

We already covered that above, it was a house under construction. People go into them and look around all the time. It is literally a daily occurrence for houses that are under construction but not to the point of being locked up yet.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

That's a tough one. If Arbery decided his life was in danger and a couple of good old boys had run him down cuz he was black, and he decided he should go down fighting, and they were not within their legal rights to stop him, I'm having a difficult time putting the blame on Arbery there.

t's chit event all around. The aspect that continues to stick in my craw is that the shooter was long time LEO and seemingly had a solid idea of the legality of those actions. It makes me feel like we are missing some piece of the puzzle.

In the Zimmerman/Martin case the notion that Martin attacked Zimmerman due to fear of his life being in danger while being stalked was at least somewhat corroborated by a phone call to his girlfriend as he was being followed. Didn't change the fact that Zimmerman was defending himself while being attacked.

At this point the evidence appears to be that no gun was fired nor anyone shot until the deceased initiated the fight and grabbed the shotgun, thus providing justifiable use of deadly force for the shooter to protect himself according to the Waycross DA.

Like Zimmerman, I belive these guys screwed up from the beginning. But I think what was occurring at the moment of the shooting will likely be the determining factor.