Was not aware of his history. Defend whitey at all costs.I'm a little disappointed in myself for not capturing his fairly predictable narrative in my narratives post.
It had ridiculous moron youtube video
It had Zimmerman is innocent
It had white victimhood
It had "YOU ARE THE TRUE RACISTS"
It had "we don't know all the facts"
In this case unless you are a KKK member or a white supremacist these two men are murdered that black man!!The phone call with his GF as she described on the stand.
But I am not surprised. The overwhelming theme of that topic is everyone's foregone conclusion, evidence be damned.
Black man is a pretty shitty description on which to chase someone down and kill them.
When the KKK and other people in the south lynched black people the generally given excuse was that the black man had committed a crime.In this case unless you are a KKK member or a white supremacist these two men are murdered that black man!!
You obviously just don't understand the circumstances. I'm sure there's a simple logical explanation for public assassination'.In this case unless you are a KKK member or a white supremacist these two men are murdered that black man!!
No there is no conflicting report! Why? Because what you call conflicting is justa false narrative perpetrated by the 2 white assassins!!Supposedly there is more than they went off the description of a "black man" here. However, if not then yes it would be racially motivated. There is conflicting reports out right now about the motivations behind the McMicheals. What a lot of people don't know, is that the father here was originally a police officer before and investigative detective. I am just having a hard time at this point in time believing that he went after some random black dude he saw running down the street because "race" as many here are wanting to call it.
Like looking at a white woman, daring to register to vote, etc.When the KKK and other people in the south lynched black people the generally given excuse was that the black man had committed a crime.
I'm having a hard time understanding his actions at all given his extensive level of training and experience.Supposedly there is more than they went off the description of a "black man" here. However, if not then yes it would be racially motivated. There is conflicting reports out right now about the motivations behind the McMicheals. What a lot of people don't know, is that the father here was originally a police officer before and investigative detective. I am just having a hard time at this point in time believing that he went after some random black dude he saw running down the street because "race" as many here are wanting to call it.
Supposedly there is more than they went off the description of a "black man" here. However, if not then yes it would be racially motivated. There is conflicting reports out right now about the motivations behind the McMicheals. What a lot of people don't know, is that the father here was originally a police officer before and investigative detective. I am just having a hard time at this point in time believing that he went after some random black dude he saw running down the street because "race" as many here are wanting to call it.
As runner passes front of the vehicle, the white man charges at him with a shot gun and fires a round.
Runner instinctually tries to control the shotgun.
You just keep wishing nothing is true.....what is true is a black man was assassinated!!It's a difficult one. What happened here is criminal regardless of race. ---That is true!
But did it happen because of race? So lets see what those two men stated -- they both stated it was a black man who had been seen burglarizing a home a few days ago....seems like race to me....
Were they not arrested and charged before the video came out because of race? That relies on facts not in evidence. ---actually no they were not arrested or charged!! Why? Because one was a ex police detective who worked for the city`s DA!! As such he was one of the brotherhood.....the thin blue line so to speak...
But it seems pretty unlikely anyone at least at this time is going to come out and say "yes I did that because I'm a racist." --- nobody has to come out and say they did anything for it to be race related -- it is very obvious -- 2 armed white assassins with guns and an unarmed Black man! What don`t you understand....
Thus, we have to use reasonable inferences to conclude this wouldn't have happened and they wouldn't have initially escaped charges if it weren't from race. -- who knows...the thin blue line still would have kept charges from being filed!
Totally possible neither of those things are true and it's unlikely without further evidence to be proven beyond reasonable doubt in court.
But that doesn't mean those inferences are wrong. Those that are saying these are definite established facts are wrong. If they want to pursue it as a hate crime, they would have to establish those grounds in court. But for society's sake, we should be looking at this as something race-related.
You just keep on keeping on.....what you see is what you want to see which is those 2 white dudes assasinated a black man!This is the moment that's going to decide the case one way or the other. It's unfortunate that the camera swerves away when it does, and that uncertainty defacto helps the defendants.
After watching a few videos I've noticed some huge discrepancies with the sound, where different videos paint very different pictures. I'm curious which video you watched.
Here's a video from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:
(warning, graphic content ahead!)
Here it appears that Ahmaud attacks Greg McMichael and the first gunshot is heard while they are struggling over the gun which is pointing away from them. If this video shows the truth, then it points to self defence.
This is in stark contrast with:
Where we see Ahmaud running towards Greg McMichael and the first gunshot is heard right about when they make contact. If this video shows the truth, then whether the incident is self defence or murder is ambiguous.
However, there's a moment near the end where there's what appears to be a muzzle flash and this doesn't match any gunshot in either video. In the second video, the muzzle flash appears around the 27s mark and a gunshot is heard about a second later. So if one were to take the audio track and move it by the same amount, then that would put Greg McMichael firing at Ahmaud right about when he clears the truck, which points to cold blooded murder.
So, given all of this it might be unwise to draw conclusions too early in any direction. I certainly want to see the original, raw, video. And I suspect that the original video may have have slippage between the audio and video that needs to be corrected. The worst thing would be if there were slippage, but it could hypothetically be corrected in either direction. The case could get technical in that we may need to figure out the characteristics of the device used to shoot the footage.
The other thing that could make a difference is what happens after the video cuts out. I don't believe for an instant that the person recording the incident stopped right there. When the video cuts off the father appears to be walking away somewhat nonchalantly (which evokes murder), while the son appears like he's about to rush towards the victim to check if he's alive (which doesn't). Specifically, I want to see whether the father appears concerned for the victim's well being in the aftermath.
It's a difficult one. What happened here is criminal regardless of race. But did it happen because of race? Were they not arrested and charged before the video came out because of race? That relies on facts not in evidence. But it seems pretty unlikely anyone at least at this time is going to come out and say "yes I did that because I'm a racist." Thus, we have to use reasonable inferences to conclude this wouldn't have happened and they wouldn't have initially escaped charges if it weren't from race. Totally possible neither of those things are true and it's unlikely without further evidence to be proven beyond reasonable doubt in court.
But that doesn't mean those inferences are wrong. Those that are saying these are definite established facts are wrong. If they want to pursue it as a hate crime, they would have to establish those grounds in court. But for society's sake, we should be looking at this as something race-related.
You just keep on keeping on.....what you see is what you want to see which is those 2 white dudes assasinated a black man!
No it was not self defense! How can it be self defense when they were chasing the black dude with 2 cars and they both were armed? IF it was self defense , then it was the black guy defending himself against 2 assassins!!
You just keep on keeping on.....what you see is what you want to see which is those 2 white dudes assasinated a black man!
No it was not self defense! How can it be self defense when they were chasing the black dude with 2 cars and they both were armed? IF it was self defense , then it was the black guy defending himself against 2 assassins!!
You just keep wishing nothing is true.....what is true is a black man was assassinated!!
stay safe!!
I'm curious which video you watched.
What an absolutist, ideological, and rigidly partisan position. Hypothetically, if the black man were to initiate violence against the white men, and then tried to capture a firearm, but got shot in the process, that would be defacto self defence. Now, I doubt this is what happened in this case. I'm actually leaning towards the cold-blooded murder prognosis because it doesn't make sense to me why one would run towards and attack the guys brandishing guns if he wasn't high on angel dust or something... but given the huge discrepancies between the videos that are out there I'll wait until I see a recording I know is authoritative before passing final judgement.
Greg McMichael told Glynn County police that Arbery was suspected in "several break-ins," but no such string of crimes was reported in the weeks before the shooting.
...
Prior to Arbery's shooting, the man said in a second interview Wednesday, the cameras on three or four occasions captured someone walking on the property at night -- one time stealing $2,500 of fishing tackle from a boat in his garage -- but he could not identify the perpetrator.
He did not file a police report, he said, but called the incident "unnerving and unsettling."
In the more than seven weeks preceding the shooting, there was only one burglary report in the neighborhood, said Glynn County police Lt. Cheri Bashlor.
Video Leaks of Unarmed Black Man Gunned Down on Street by White Father-Son Duo: ‘They Literally Hunted This Poor Man Down’
A video showing the shooting death of Ahmaud Arbery has emerged more than two months after the incident occurred. The video begins with Arbery joggingatlantablackstar.com
I'm actually leaning towards the cold-blooded murder prognosis because it doesn't make sense to me why one would run towards and attack the guys brandishing guns if he wasn't high on angel dust or something...
Video Leaks of Unarmed Black Man Gunned Down on Street by White Father-Son Duo: ‘They Literally Hunted This Poor Man Down’
A video showing the shooting death of Ahmaud Arbery has emerged more than two months after the incident occurred. The video begins with Arbery joggingatlantablackstar.com
GA law states in order to make a citizens arrest you must have either "witnessed" the crime or have knowledge a crime was just committed. Let's assume he was a suspect, those 2 guys were not in any position to know if a crime had just been committed. They had no grounds for a citizens arrest.Arbery matched at the time the description of the person burglarizing their neighborhood. There is no law that prevents people from confronting other people for anything. They approached Arbery to ascertain further if he was someone that was they burglar or not. Shit went wrong.
The difference in what you are saying is that these two guys are already known and questioned by the cops. Arbery hadn't been at that point in time. I don't think the two guys should have got out with guns in hand and confronted Arbery that way. While it would have been better to call cops, and follow behind to keep the cops informed of where he was going to let the cops take care of things when they got there, that isn't what happened. I don't think it is a horrible idea usually to make a friendly stop to ask someone, but there are certainly risks to the person doing so. If they are willing to accept those risks then whatever. But when you have a gun in hand, it is no longer a "friendly" stop at that point. It is now brandishing and a use of force when there was no need for such use of force at that point in time. That is where they fucked up in my opinion with the law. At least the laws in most places, and maybe where they are the laws are different to allow that. I doubt it though. There is allowed escalation of use of force for both citizens and officials. These guys didn't follow that. They came out brandishing with weapons in hand and that in most places is already against the law. When someone dies over it, that is usually negligent homicide or manslaughter (depending).
Good intentions and ignorance lead to bad outcome.