Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
MTP Reggie

No burglaries were reported in neighborhood where Arbery was killed

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Taggart Transcontinental
4 minutes ago, That_Guy said:

Did you miss the part about thinking the video would exonerate his friends?

Do I care? It's about time we start nailing people that leak videos and evidence. Starting at the top and work down.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

Owner says he did not report crime after video shows man on property in neighborhood where Ahmaud Arbery was killed

By Justine Coleman - 05/13/20 10:11 AM EDT

Excerpt:

The owner of a house under construction in the Georgia neighborhood where Ahmaud Arbery was killed said Tuesday night that he had not reported a crime after surveillance video showed a man on his property the day Arbery died.

The security video footage, taken on Feb. 23 shortly before Arbery’s death, shows a man looking around the construction site in Brunswick, Ga. An African American man wearing a white T-shirt and tan shorts can be seen in the video. The man does not touch anything before eventually walking away. 

Arbery was wearing a white T-shirt, khaki shorts, Nike sneakers and a bandanna when he was killed, The New York Times reported

When CNN’s Chris Cuomo asked the homeowner, Larry English, if he believed Arbery took anything from his property, English responded, “No.”

"I don't want it to be put out and misused and misinterpreted for people to think that I had accused Mr. Arbery of stealing or robbery, because I never did," English said.

English’s attorney, Elizabeth Graddy, said her client was alerted to a person in his home through his security system and contacted a neighbor about 20 minutes after the alert. The neighbor told him a person had been in the house but had been killed, she said.  

"By the time Larry saw the video, Mr. Arbery had been killed," she said.

Graddy said in a statement to CNN that English originally believed the man captured on his construction site was not Arbery.

“And then subsequently, we heard that that probably was him,” she said.

Greg McMichael and Travis McMichael were arrested last week and face charges of felony murder and aggravated assault for Arbery’s death. The two, who are white, claimed that they had seen Arbery in a surveillance video after several break-ins in the neighborhood, according to the police report. 

But English told CNN he did not share the video of the man on his property with the McMichaels and had not personally shared any other incidents that may have occurred at his property to the father and son. 

<snip>

The Hill

 

 

 

 

  • Disagree (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Junto
Posted (edited)

 

Well that is interesting.

Edited by Junto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
13 hours ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

You watched the video too right? The video clearly shows the guy shot at the right side of the vehicle, he turns and engages the guy that is about 10 feet away and grabs the weapon, he is then shot. That's in the video. I have every way of knowing what happened because I have 2 eyes and they watched the video.

As far as Mr A, I agree he acted based on a perceived threat. I believe his actions were reasonable as well, I just do not believe that this is an intentional killing which is what Georgia has to prove in a murder case. Remember it is not the responsibility of the shooter to prove innocence, it is the States duty to prove guilt. That's where this falls apart for them.

When the son brought the weapon, and attempted to stop the individual it is a use of force. Use of force for law enforcement starts with arriving on the scene of a crime. If we show up and knock on the door, isn't that a use of force? The badge, the equipment, the official duty? Thus yes the second you attempt contact you are using force. Whether it's lethal or not is what is relevant, a firearm at ready is not lethal force. When the weapon is pointed is the moment it becomes lethal force. That is when it indicates intent to impose will. Thus the person on the bang side is now under no illusions that they can just wander away.

To answer the rest of your loaded questions, (are they chambered), place yourself in a situation. If you are going to contact someone that has just committed a crime, do you bring

a: wiffle ball bat

b: Fuzzy maid duster

C; a damn gun.

You have no idea about the intent of the guy you are about to interact with. One thing is certain he's violating the law and you decided to do something about it, unlike most sheeple in this nation. You better bring a gun. I am sure he's got something to ensure he will have an opportunity to remain free. Incidentally when do you think it's most dangerous for a cop? Generally right after the first handcuff is put on. That's when it becomes real for the suspect, they now realize they will lose their freedom and you are close so if they attack they can get you. Freedom for a suspect that's been there done that is the most important motivator when interacting with someone that may deprive them of it.

As far as it being a reasonable action? That will be up to the jury to decide based on all the evidence (note not facts) provided. They will figure that all out.

 

1.  When Arbery goes around the right side of the pick up truck, McMichaels pursues him in front of the pick up.  As they emerge to the left again, they are struggling over the weapon.  What happened in front of the pickup and what is said is not known.  Even to you.

2.  I agree and don't believe that it is murder.  

3.  It appears that you are OK that private citizens, non LEO, based on a neighbor presumably shouting something about a perp coming their way, go into their house, arm up, and then come out and confront people passing by with the threat of deadly force.  If they "didn't know if he was armed" they could have monitored until the police got there.  In no way was it necessary to confront him with weapons.

4.  I have seen all the laws you have posted.  They confronted him based on someone else's suspicion that he committed a misdemeanor, criminal trespass.  He had nothing on him and no way to carry it and the neighbor saw that the hadn't stolen anything.  So pursuing and attempting to detain, using deadly force, an individual suspected by someone else of having committed a misdemeanor is OK according to your statute?

 

Finally, and not in direct comment to this post, another post said he had on Nike athletic shoes when killed.  What happened to the "jogging in work boots?"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
1 hour ago, JerryL said:

1.  When Arbery goes around the right side of the pick up truck, McMichaels pursues him in front of the pick up.  As they emerge to the left again, they are struggling over the weapon.  What happened in front of the pickup and what is said is not known.  Even to you.

2.  I agree and don't believe that it is murder.  

3.  It appears that you are OK that private citizens, non LEO, based on a neighbor presumably shouting something about a perp coming their way, go into their house, arm up, and then come out and confront people passing by with the threat of deadly force.  If they "didn't know if he was armed" they could have monitored until the police got there.  In no way was it necessary to confront him with weapons.

4.  I have seen all the laws you have posted.  They confronted him based on someone else's suspicion that he committed a misdemeanor, criminal trespass.  He had nothing on him and no way to carry it and the neighbor saw that the hadn't stolen anything.  So pursuing and attempting to detain, using deadly force, an individual suspected by someone else of having committed a misdemeanor is OK according to your statute?

 

Finally, and not in direct comment to this post, another post said he had on Nike athletic shoes when killed.  What happened to the "jogging in work boots?"

 

It don't matter what was said, honestly. They are struggling over the weapon. That's never a good thing when you are on the side that goes bang.

3. Welcome to the real world outside of the US where people have to defend themselves. People in other countries don't wait for the cops they deal with the problem at hand. When did we surrender our rights to the government simply because someone has a badge?

I also said that, however they chose to. That's hindsight, you know he wasn't armed, they didn't. You have to know what they knew at the time. Hindsight does not work when applying law. You have to work from what they knew at the time. To do anything else is not how this works.

4. No they confronted him under the assumption that he was in the act of burglary. Depending on the law in the state it is either a felony or misdemeanor. I told the group what he actually did was criminal trespass. Their statement is that he was a burglary suspect. I want to make this clear. I explained the law. I was challenging the parsing that T_G runs down rabbit holes with. This is just another series of "chambered round" and Loaded firearm BS he does. I am not OK with what they did. I never said they did the right thing. I am just saying when you look at the law they have a defensible position. I also believe they were well over charged on this act. The charge will not stick no matter how good the GBI is at articulating it.

I never stated he was jogging in working boots. Someone stated that he could have been working there. I stated if he was working he would have equipment, not jogging down the street and ducking into a construction site.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
6 hours ago, Junto said:

 

Well that is interesting.

Hmmm well lets see, he lacked "firearms qualification and deadly force training". The firearms qualification is not surprising, if the department he is affiliated with is not doing any firearms training then that slips on guys in the DA's office. It happens. The Deadly Force training. That's a major screw up. You gotta do annual training on deadly force and the procedures for it. Hell our Procedural Guide is 22 pages long in deadly force and the times of when etc to use it. That's also a requirement for LEOSA.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

It don't matter what was said, honestly. They are struggling over the weapon. That's never a good thing when you are on the side that goes bang.

3. Welcome to the real world outside of the US where people have to defend themselves. People in other countries don't wait for the cops they deal with the problem at hand. When did we surrender our rights to the government simply because someone has a badge?

I also said that, however they chose to. That's hindsight, you know he wasn't armed, they didn't. You have to know what they knew at the time. Hindsight does not work when applying law. You have to work from what they knew at the time. To do anything else is not how this works.

4. No they confronted him under the assumption that he was in the act of burglary. Depending on the law in the state it is either a felony or misdemeanor. I told the group what he actually did was criminal trespass. Their statement is that he was a burglary suspect. I want to make this clear. I explained the law. I was challenging the parsing that T_G runs down rabbit holes with. This is just another series of "chambered round" and Loaded firearm BS he does. I am not OK with what they did. I never said they did the right thing. I am just saying when you look at the law they have a defensible position. I also believe they were well over charged on this act. The charge will not stick no matter how good the GBI is at articulating it.

I never stated he was jogging in working boots. Someone stated that he could have been working there. I stated if he was working he would have equipment, not jogging down the street and ducking into a construction site.

That's right.  They confronted him over the assumption of burglary.  The only thing anyone saw was him coming out of an unsecured building under construction.  The leap to burglary is just that, a leap.  I don't think that you can get a reasonable suspicion of burglary from that, particularly when you had witnessed NOTHING.

 

Sorry, but if you instigate an altercation while armed and the other guy gets killed that is not self defense.   You are right.  This is the US and Arbery had every right to defend himself against an armed man confronting him.  He could have very well been exercising self defense against the self appointed LEO in trying to take the weapon.  (BTW, my opinion of Zimmerman, no matter what Trayvon did or was suspected to do, would have been the same had Zimmerman pursued him, initiated the confrontation, and threatened him with a weapon.)

 

I specifically said that this was not a response to you.  In this or another thread, people were saying, "Oh yeah, I always go "jogging" in my work boots 10 miles away from my home."

Edited by JerryL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
grimreefer

Gotta say that I'm in agreement with Colion Noir and Dana Loesch with this one as it stands now. Follow the facts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13
On ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2020 at 10:01 AM, Taggart Transcontinental said:

So a lawyer, decided arbitrarily to as I stated force the hand of law enforcement. Regardless of what they SAY, its immaterial, they got their desired result. People lie.

There was a twist to this story.  Gregory McMichael, HIMSELF, was responsible for the leaking of the video.  Apparently, he thought it would help his situation.

  • Disagree (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
9 minutes ago, Dutch13 said:

There was a twist to this story.  Gregory McMichael, HIMSELF, was responsible for the leaking of the video.  Apparently, he thought it would help his situation.

It still may help it. Like I said before once this gets to a jury they will determine the facts of the case. Not the media crap show that is going on now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown
Quote

 

When CNN’s Chris Cuomo asked the homeowner, Larry English, if he believed Arbery took anything from his property, English responded, “No.”

"I don't want it to be put out and misused and misinterpreted for people to think that I had accused Mr. Arbery of stealing or robbery, because I never did," English said.

 

Translation:  I do not wish to be the target of property damage and death threats against myself or my family because of this situation.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird
2 hours ago, Dutch13 said:

There was a twist to this story.  Gregory McMichael, HIMSELF, was responsible for the leaking of the video.  Apparently, he thought it would help his situation.

 

The man who filmed this has now been charged with murder.  https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/crime/man-who-reportedly-filmed-ahmaud-arberys-killing-charged-with-murder/77-9f3dc03f-e724-4faa-812c-bed8aac746be

I've read statements that this chase actually went on for 4 minutes, but the video only shows 30 seconds of it.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Disagree (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Severian
52 minutes ago, Ladybird said:

 

The man who filmed this has now been charged with murder.  https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/crime/man-who-reportedly-filmed-ahmaud-arberys-killing-charged-with-murder/77-9f3dc03f-e724-4faa-812c-bed8aac746be

I've read statements that this chase actually went on for 4 minutes, but the video only shows 30 seconds of it.

Seems like a real politically motivated stretch to charge a guy sitting in his car far back from the action with murder. I think they are being pressured into bringing max charges against everybody and it will result in acquittal due to overcharging/inability to prove the charges and then all hell will break loose, riots, protests, etc.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg
55 minutes ago, Ladybird said:

 

The man who filmed this has now been charged with murder.  https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/crime/man-who-reportedly-filmed-ahmaud-arberys-killing-charged-with-murder/77-9f3dc03f-e724-4faa-812c-bed8aac746be

I've read statements that this chase actually went on for 4 minutes, but the video only shows 30 seconds of it.

“I’ve read statements....” 

This is EXACTLY what I’m talking about. Absolutely NO DESIRE to find out the truth, only a deep desire to satisfy one’s own deeply biased opinion before all critical facts are known. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird
14 minutes ago, zurg said:

“I’ve read statements....” 

This is EXACTLY what I’m talking about. Absolutely NO DESIRE to find out the truth, only a deep desire to satisfy one’s own deeply biased opinion before all critical facts are known. 

"I've read" means you are free to verify it for yourself. I have not seen this 4 minute video, but have read of its existence.  I did not state categorically that it does exist.

  • Disagree (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
3 hours ago, Ladybird said:

 

The man who filmed this has now been charged with murder.  https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/crime/man-who-reportedly-filmed-ahmaud-arberys-killing-charged-with-murder/77-9f3dc03f-e724-4faa-812c-bed8aac746be

I've read statements that this chase actually went on for 4 minutes, but the video only shows 30 seconds of it.

I wonder how they are going to justify a charge of murder for someone that was shooting a video. The first two charges of murder are a stretch to begin with and prosecutorial over reach. Charging someone with murder for shooting a video? That's beyond stretching it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
2 hours ago, Severian said:

Seems like a real politically motivated stretch to charge a guy sitting in his car far back from the action with murder. I think they are being pressured into bringing max charges against everybody and it will result in acquittal due to overcharging/inability to prove the charges and then all hell will break loose, riots, protests, etc.

Then they can call Trump a racist right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird
16 hours ago, Severian said:

Seems like a real politically motivated stretch to charge a guy sitting in his car far back from the action with murder. I think they are being pressured into bringing max charges against everybody and it will result in acquittal due to overcharging/inability to prove the charges and then all hell will break loose, riots, protests, etc.

Maybe the investigators have found something they are not ready to reveal yet.  William Bryan has claimed he was just a witness who had nothing to do with the chase, and didn't get involved until Arbery and the McMicheals passed his home.  Is it the whole truth? Stay tuned..

  • Disagree (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...