Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting to hear everything about the case and the reasons why not all the info is coming out.
What matters is Arbery made a horrible decision when he attacked McMichael in order to not go to jail. He wasn't in fear for his life unless there is proof that the McMichaels said something. Looking at the video the shotgun wasn't being pointed in an aggressive manner.
Just to be clear, Arbery had control of his own life and he made the final decision that cost him his life. Chasing him down or the Georgia Law on trespassing or citizens arrest aren't the cause of Arberys death. He died because he made a bad decision and his life wasn't threatened.
Would you be in fear for your life if 3 men who you didn't know, in two trucks chased you over three different streets, and corralled you between their trucks, one standing in the road with a shot gun, and one standing in a truck bed with a hand gun?
Would you be in fear for your life if 3 men who you didn't know, in two trucks chased you over three different streets, and corralled you between their trucks, one standing in the road with a shot gun, and one standing in a truck bed with a hand gun?
Since they were not pointed at me no I wouldn't. But it isn't about me, it's about what is reasonable. Too many people have this knee jerk stereotype that those with guns are irrational when the norm is the exact opposite.
I'll say it again, just having a gun out isn't a threat unless something verbal is said. The gun wasn't pointed at Arbery in an aggressive manner. The smart move is too wait it out.
No they didn't. They didn't know who he was, and I think that's another thing the jury (if there is one) will have to answer. This becomes a little confusing, because Arbery's mother knew who McMichaels was, the man who had helped prosecute her son for crimes. It's not reciprocal - McMichaels doesn't appear to know who Arbery is.
Here are the questions for the court:
"Did McMichaels know the identity of the repeat trespasser in the neighborhood?"
and
"Is it reasonable that McMichaels believed this man who he gave to chase to, had committed felonies".
You haven't even established that Arbery was a repeat trespasser. The video from two weeks prior could possibly be of Arbery. But it could possibly be someone else. It's such a poor video, I am unsure if it could even be cleaned up to make an identification. As for the neighbor saying it was Arbery, again, such an identification is very unreliable.
At the end of the day, McMichaels saw a black man running in his neighborhood. That man was similar to a man he had seen, briefly, in the dark, two weeks ago. That man may have been Arbery, or may not have been. Nothing was stolen that time, and nothing was stolen this time. You can argue that McMichaels didn't know that nothing had been stolen, but presumably he had eyes to see that the running man wasn't carrying anything.
As for believing that Arbery had committed felonies, "reasonable" would depend on actual reasons. McMichaels had what reasons? While there may have been neighborhood gossip about thefts, except for the McMichaels' gun, there are no reports of any thefts. So the thefts clearly weren't of any significant items. While the house under construction may have been trespassed upon, trespass isn't a felony, and per the owner, there were several other trespassers. Arbery wasn't the only trespasser.
Did McMichaels believe that the running man was the same man who had stolen his son's gun? If so, why would he believe that?
The act of trespassing can lead to a lawsuit or injury claims against the home owner and/or construction firms.
I'm not at all talking about the after effect of being chased or detained.
I'm simply addressing this nonsense about all these posters who claim its no big deal because they do it all the time. They are just being selfish and saying their curiosity outweighs the possible impact to those folks who own or are involved in construction at the house.
Its a VERY good reason why all of this "I/he was just curious" and its harmless nonsense is just a boat load of selfish BS.
Perhaps you should contact your state's legislature with your concerns and lobby them to pass new laws against looky-loos at constructions sites.
The homeowner has changed his story many times. He originally said he was missing $2500 in fishing equipment, which the McMichael's somehow knew although English states he didn't tell them.
Just like they knew he had been in that house before, through Perez's video.
Could you provide a link to where the McMichaels say they knew of the missing $2500 in fishing equipment?
Since they were not pointed at me no I wouldn't. But it isn't about me, it's about what is reasonable. Too many people have this knee jerk stereotype that those with guns are irrational when the norm is the exact opposite.
I'll say it again, just having a gun out isn't a threat unless something verbal is said. The gun wasn't pointed at Arbery in an aggressive manner. The smart move is too wait it out.
A reasonable post. I might be inclined to agree with you if:
1. They knew each other and there was some degree of understanding.
2. If there hadn't been that chasing him with the truck.
3. If there wasn't a history of white guys riding around lynching black guys in the not to distant past.
The first year Obama ran for president you might recall that their were black panthers outside a voting place in Phili. Whites were intimidated and felt threatened because the blacks where standing there with baseball bats.
If the guns were not drawn, I might feel ok about it. But not after being chased, not being out numbered, and not when the weapons are drawn.
THis isn't a Michael Brown scenario. I was all in for that cop. It was a good shoot.
Zimmerman was iffy at best. He also forced the confrontation by pursuing the victim.
The smart move was to call the police and let them do their jobs. I'm sorry but it isn't normal or reasonable to chase a man with a vehicle and loaded guns over a simple trespass. It just isn't.
Last edited by boneyard1962; 05-15-2020 at 08:24 AM..
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 1 day ago)
35,585 posts, read 17,927,273 times
Reputation: 50620
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd
The following is a hypothetical, and has nothing to do with the instant case.
If in GA you were to pursue someone that hadn’t committed a felony, indeed had committed no crime at all, what GA law would you be violating (actual statute from the code would be nice), and what crime(s) could you be charged with?
I think you're going to have to be more specific, TaxPhd. What was the motivation? In some cases, you'd be committing zero crime at all. You can certainly legally pursue someone who has committed no crime if:
- you believe that person is walking a dog that is actually yours, that went missing
- you believe you went to high school with that person and are interested in reconnecting
- that person is driving a very unusual truck similar to one caught on video camera at your construction site stealing materials
- you believe that person just hit your car and took off, doing a level of damage less than felony
- that van matches the description you heard on the news about someone attempting to lure children
I could go on all day. You're going to have to be more specific.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
