Ahmaud Arbery Shooting

[kwelz]

Let me see if I understand Core781's logic here. If I am confronted by 2 armed men and I take measures to defend myself then I am the aggressor?

So if someone threatens me with a gun and I draw and shoot them, then that makes me wrong? Because that is EXACTLY what you are saying.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

So there can't be one of these narratives that are true because of these spun titles?

What concerns me is the same people complaining about the media and headline spins, are the same ones that are beating this into the ground as a justified shooting, simply because it's white on black crime.

Sure there can. I'm sure there are many who consider all to be true.

The media usually initially spins these type of cases in one direction. It feeds the mob's truth. Whether it accurately reflects actual events and motives is a different matter.

[WillBrink]

Let me see if I understand Core781's logic here. If I am confronted by 2 armed men and I take measures to defend myself then I am the aggressor?

So if someone threatens me with a gun and I draw and shoot them, then that makes me wrong? Because that is EXACTLY what you are saying.

Depends on the circumstances does it not?

You killed someone with your car, you then got out and ran down the road. Two men saw you and gave chase. On catching up to you they held guns in their hands at a low ready type position and told you not to move and they were making a citizens arrest. You're armed and decide to draw on them and they kill you. In that circumstance, yes, you're viewed as being in the wrong legally and the aggressor I believe.

So totality of the situation and circumstances dictate that and we can develop examples where you're also not in the wrong legally, nor the aggressor. In this event, that's what's being debated: did they they the legal Right to pursue him as they did based on what they knew/saw, and answering that, goes a long way as to who was in the wrong legally and who was the aggressor.

I suspect they can get a manslaughter conviction from this event, but as knew facts keep dropping, I get pulled in both directions on it.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

A. Did the McMichaels have a legal right to be where they were and what they were doing?

No = they are screwed.
Yes = proceed to B.

B. Did the shooter have reasonable fear of imminent peril at the moment of the shooting?

Likely an easy yes.

[jsbhike]

I finally got to see the unedited video of the Arbery shooting with sound.

I've moved from manslaughter and maybe murder to just murder. Not sure 1st or 2nd would have to read Georgia law about that.

What changed for me was the 1st shot, which is only heard, occurs as soon as Arbury begins to round the passenger side of the truck towards the shooter.

He was not in contact with the shooter before the first shot. So it wasnt a "fighting over the gun" thing until after the first shot is fired.

So, they got an email from a video camera, probably viewed it, went looking for the guy who had walked on the property they thought was a misdemeanor thief or trespasser, found and chased the person they thought it was, (who tried to evade) and when he came towards the guy with the shotgun, he was shot and killed.

More simply, a guy suspected another guy of being a misdemeanor thief or trespasser, chased him down and killed him. Yea that's murder.

Arbery had been on English's property. The McMichaels hadn't received any notice about that and English had never spoke to them.

Allegedly, Travis McMichael had confronted Arbery over being on English's property with a possibility that Travis McMichael also entered English's property.

[Renegade]

You killed someone with your car, you then got out and ran down the road. Two men saw you and gave chase. On catching up to you they held guns in their hands at a low ready type position and told you not to move and they were making a citizens arrest. You're armed and decide to draw on them and they kill you. In that circumstance, yes, you're viewed as being in the wrong legally and the aggressor I believe.

So totality of the situation and circumstances dictate that and we can develop examples where you're also not in the wrong legally, nor the aggressor. In this event, that's what's being debated: did they they the legal Right to pursue him as they did based on what they knew/saw, and answering that, goes a long way as to who was in the wrong legally and who was the aggressor.

Correct, but their is also Arbery actions.

Did he have a reasonable belief his life was in danger and act reasonable? Well he did NOT just kill someone with a car. He was not escaping a felony. etc. So yeah, WTF are these guys chasing me for, and why did he just get out of the truck confronting me with a gun? He had less time than it takes to read this sentence to decide how to react to an assailant a few feet from him with a gun.

[Renegade]

A. Did the McMichaels have a legal right to be where they were and what they were doing?

No = they are screwed.
Yes = proceed to B.

B. Did the shooter have reasonable fear of imminent peril at the moment of the shooting?

Likely an easy yes.

A. Did Arbery have a legal right to be where he was and what he was doing?

No = he are screwed.
Yes = proceed to B.

B. Did Arbery have reasonable fear of imminent peril at the moment of the shooting?

Likely an easy yes.

Fun game to play isn't it.

[jsbhike]

[Adrenaline_6]

Again, if this was truly a citizens arrest and you substitute these two guys for police officers, (the guy doesn't stop, the officers are armed and in pursuit, they catch up, the pursued turns and defends himself, the officer shoots and suspect is killed. Does your opinion change? If it does, you now see the conundrum this situation has caused.

[B Cart]

Let me see if I understand Core781's logic here. If I am confronted by 2 armed men and I take measures to defend myself then I am the aggressor?

So if someone threatens me with a gun and I draw and shoot them, then that makes me wrong? Because that is EXACTLY what you are saying.

Trying to understand Core's logic won't get you very far in this thread. He keeps regurgitating the same weak attempt to show Arbery as the aggressor, while still failing to answer the two pertinent questions: Were the McMichaels LEGALLY justified in performing a citizens arrest of Arbery? According to GA law, the answer is clearly NO, which puts them in commission of a felony for attempted false arrest, not to mention committing their felony while in possession of a firearm. He also won't answer the question about why, if Arbery was running at the truck to attack like Core claims, did Arbery run away from McMichaels around the opposite side of the truck?

Arbery clearly didn't attack until McMichaels came around the truck to get him after Arbery went the other way.

These points have been brought up by multiple people in this thread, but Core and others defending McMichales seem to conveniently neglect from answering.