Why the murderers of Ahmaud Arbery need to be prosecuted

[dannno]

Fvck no. Here's what you did NOT highlight.

McMichael testified that he pointed his gun at Arbery — saying his intent was to get him to back off — and Arbery then turned and ran around the passenger side.

That was because he was running full speed straight at him, I think he was only about 20 feet away at that point and he was in fear for his life... he was trying to de escalate the situation, which the laywers on Rekeita were mocking, but it is often a useful strategy for de escalation.

Also, they had reason to suspect he was armed.

[dannno]

the neigbor helping them had no right to strike him with his truck.

Arbery was grabbing for the door handles on the truck..

[dannno]

Do you disagree with this? Do you think that you do have a right to detain someone for no more of an excuse than that you suspect that they committed a crime without respect for what your reasons are for that suspicion or what crime you suspect it was?

It was more than "suspect", they are effectively arguing they had probable cause, based on the totality of the situation, which had been ongoing for weeks. They had already had a 4am confrontation where they witnessed him, what appeared to be, reaching for a gun.

[dannno]

If it was proven that he was a criminal, would that change anything?

I don't see how it would, unless it was the case that he had just committed a crime, and the guys who shot him caught him in the criminal act itself.

They had probable cause to believe he had just committed a crime.. if you break into a house with the intent to steal, that is a felony. The direct knowledge question is one for the jury, they need to decide based on the totality of the situation, not just the details of what happened in that moment, all in a vacuum.

[dannno]

Yes, obviously you can surrender and hope that all he wants to do is detain you until police arrive. But you have no assurance of this. You have reasonable fear that you will be executed on the spot, based on what has already transpired up to that point.

He had just committed a crime, that is known, it's on video. Arbery knew that he had committed a crime. There is no reasonable fear of being executed when they had already come up to you and said, "stop, we want to talk to you" and "the police are coming" and they could have executed him then if they wanted to.

[Invisible Man]

He had just committed a crime, that is known, it's on video. Arbery knew that he had committed a crime. There is no reasonable fear of being executed when they had already come up to you and said, "stop, we want to talk to you" and "the police are coming" and they could have executed him then if they wanted to.

Not just could have. They did.

[dannno]

Not just could have. They did.

Uh, no.. he was attacked and defended himself. He had the opportunity to execute him while he was not being attacked if he wanted to, but did not.

It's these kind of completely unreasonable statements that do not bring people to your side.

[Brian4Liberty]

Oh bullshyt! It's never been proven that Arbery was a criminal. And regardless, even Kyle Rittenhouse said on the fvcking stand that he understood he didn't have the right to use deadly force to protect property. I was all for Kyles acquittal. That was self defense pure and simple. And the first guy Kyle shot was a multiple pedophile who had set fire to a dumpster and was pushing it to a gas station. The real takeaway from the Arbery case is don't go jogging without a gun. Arbery should have been armed and shot those two MFs so that he could be on trial and they could be in the ground. This forum is just retarded sometimes.

I said “undercurrent”. The agenda slightly below the surface. You want to talk about the details of the cases.

So let’s look at some detail:

“And regardless, even Kyle Rittenhouse said on the fvcking stand that he understood he didn't have the right to use deadly force to protect property.”

I don't know the law in that state, or in any specific state on defense of private property. That line of questioning in the Rittenhouse case is exactly what I am talking about. They want to say you have no right to defend property. It is part of the Marxist agenda to eliminate private property. I don’t agree with that. I’m more of the mind that “looters will be shot”. Your legality will vary, but what is the natural right here? What is moral?

As for the specifics of the Arbery case, the guys chasing him were no longer defending property. But they were trying to perform a citizen’s arrest on a suspicious person with a history of being suspicious in the area, and possibly stealing. This was not a random jogger. Obviously deadly force is not called for in this situation, even if they were the Police trying to get him to stop. What would happen if those were police and Arbery tried to wrestle a cop for his shotgun?

It was more than "suspect", they are effectively arguing they had probable cause, based on the totality of the situation, which had been ongoing for weeks. They had already had a 4am confrontation where they witnessed him, what appeared to be, reaching for a gun.

That is what distinguishes Arbery from a random jogger. There is a history, there have been things stolen, there is middle of the night camera footage, and the neighborhood is involved in keeping an eye out.

[Brian4Liberty]

Do you disagree with this?

No.

Do you think that you do have a right to detain someone for no more of an excuse than that you suspect that they committed a crime without respect for what your reasons are for that suspicion or what crime you suspect it was?

In this specific case, it was not just an “excuse”. There is history, there is camera evidence.

Are you saying you enjoy prowlers creeping around your property in the middle of the night? What is your solution? Call the Police and hide under your bed?

You can go ahead and play dead and pray for the Police to save you. That is your decision. Other people may be more proactive.

Obviously the shooting should be avoided, even if you have to let a prowler flee. Nothing wrong with continuing to follow until it can be passed to the Police. But once again, what happens when the person decides to wrestle you or a cop for their gun?

And all of that is just details. The big picture is this is about a Marxist agenda against private property. Marxist DAs refuse to prosecute. Marxist politicians tell Police not to arrest criminals. This is not just a strange support and leniency for criminals. That is the story for the bleeding hearts. It is a war on private property.

[Brian4Liberty]

Yeah....except they did far more than just "follow, confront or detain" Arbery. One of them admittedly pointed a gun at Arbery BEFORE Arbery tried to grab the gun in order to get him to "back off." Really? You're been chasing someone down, your buddy, that struck him with his truck, is following behind and you claim you need him to "back off" as if HE is the aggressor? That's what @Brian4Liberty left out. The McMichaels and their buddy put Arbery in reasonable fear of his life, not just fear of arrest, and then when Arbery defended himself they shot him. This is miles appart from Kyle Rittenhouse who was trying to get away from Rosenberg.

Personal recent story. As we were leaving our house we heard a shot. Three white men had just killed a deer. We don't allow hunting on our property. They were right on the side of the road so I suppose one could argue it was "public property" but I'm pretty sure it dosn't work that way. Even if it did, they were not in hunting season. (They were during the time when bucks could be hunted, but only with air rifles and muzzle loaders.) The deer was a doe. (Full grown with no antlers). As I drove passed I rolled down my window and said "You know you're hunting illegally right?" To which the oldest man responded "It was hit and I just finished it off." The doe's legs were still kicking so that was a poor job of "finishing off" a deer. I was unarmed. But even if I was, would it have been worth chasisng these guys down and potentially getting into a gunfight? Over a deer? Oh but they "broke the law." Yep. They sure did.

In my state, trespassing and property crime is rampant and blatant. Sure if it’s a high-end store being looted, it makes the news, and politicians will say they will do something (about the situation they created).

But if it is your property, forget about it. Your house got robbed? Car got broken into? Sure, we’ll send out a community service officer to take a report in the next day or two. Oh, you know who the robber is, and they are right down the street living a tent? Sorry, that is not public property, and we have no jurisdiction. The homeless call the police on you if you tell them to leave, and then the Police will come and tell you that you can't do anything, they can't do anything, and that it's the voter's fault for electing communists.

Don't worry, it will come to you eventually. People will hunt and camp on your land, and the Komissar will arrest you if you complain. You obviously have too much, and need to share with those who want it.

[Invisible Man]

Obviously the shooting should be avoided, even if you have to let a prowler flee. Nothing wrong with continuing to follow until it can be passed to the Police. But once again, what happens when the person decides to wrestle you or a cop for their gun?

This settles the case right here. If I let the prowler flee, and that's what they do, then there's no occasion for them to wrestle me for my gun. If they are the pursuer, like what happened to Rittenhouse, and which is the opposite of this case, then I'm within my rights to shoot them.

[Brian4Liberty]

This settles the case right here. If I let the prowler flee, and that's what they do, then there's no occasion for them to wrestle me for my gun.

Doesn't settle the "case". It just means there were other options, just like you have the option to hide under your bed.

The "case" is about the shooting. If you are close enough at any time, the suspect can run at you and grab your gun. It can happen to a cop just as easily. You refuse to address that. Does a cop have more rights than an individual?

[69360]

Here are my thoughts on this one without all the beatng around the bush and double talk. I think Arbery was a thief. I think the McMicheals are a bit racist like lots of southern good old boy types. I think they did have a right to follow him after calling the cops on him. I think Arbery got himself killed when he grabbed for the gun. Is that self defense? Probably so. The whole thing is regrettable.

[dannno]

This settles the case right here. If I let the prowler flee, and that's what they do, then there's no occasion for them to wrestle me for my gun. If they are the pursuer, like what happened to Rittenhouse, and which is the opposite of this case, then I'm within my rights to shoot them.

Your presumption is that they were pursuing him to shoot him. That was not the case. They were pursuing him to ensure he was handed off to police custody. If you are a citizen and you chase somebody down and try to falsely imprison them, then you can get in a lot of trouble. However in this case it is clear that they were correct, he had committed multiple crimes including one on that day right before he ran off.

If he was just a guy out jogging, and he really was just on the property looking at the construction, then they would be in a lot of trouble right now with very little if any chance of getting off and I would likely be siding with Arbery. I would still be very suspicious, but without any evidence that he had committed or intended to commit a felony, they wouldn't have much ground to stand on. However, knowing that the McMichaels were correct - he had been there multiple times, including in the middle of the night and stolen in excess of $1,000 of equipment, that means it is more than reasonable to assume his intent to be there was to steal valuable items. That gives them the justification for what they did, even if there are some semantics and wording of the law that put it close to the legal/illegal threshold. That is because the law does not really address people who have been witnessed in multiple offenses over time by the people initiating the citizens arrest. The way the law is being interpreted it seems it is more geared toward somebody who has possibly committed a single offense.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Am I the only one who is completely disgusted by both parties in this case?

I'm not feeling love for either side.

The only thing I know is that we all lose on this one.

That's probably why I haven't really followed it. Everytime I start looking into it, both Ahmaud and those who confronted him turn my stomach. I also don't know who to believe. The video shows a part of it, but not the whole thing. I will leave it in the jury's hands.

I haven't followed this too closely. I only followed the Rittenhouse case a little more.

I basically call both cases a wash. I wouldn't have convicted Rittenhouse, but he's nothing but a lying little sniveling punk. He had on rubber gloves and claims he was offering first aid. What a joke. He couldn't be honest, so he's a piece of crap in my book.

Arbery was not jogging and is a punk. Travis McMichael looks like a retard. His father is a pig, so it doesn't surprise me that the turd doesn't fall far from the tree.

Reminds of Zimmerman-Martin. You have POS rioters, punks, and thieves versus holier than thou gov bootlickers who think their good exceeds the good of everyone else. Piss on both of them.

[dannno]

I basically call both cases a wash. I wouldn't have convicted Rittenhouse, but he's nothing but a lying little sniveling punk. He had on rubber gloves and claims he was offering first aid. What a joke. He couldn't be honest, so he's a piece of crap in my book.

Kyle actually had a lot of medical training, he was also a lifeguard. He is going to school to become a nurse. He was offering first aid, there are multiple videos of him giving first aid to rioters who had been injured throughout the night. He was going around yelling "EMT, who needs medical?!" all night.

It also turns out he is pro-BLM, to the extent that he supports some of their legitimate causes and peaceful protesting to further those causes.

Did you see his interview on Tucker? He seems like a really good kid, who is also a 17 year old knucklehead (I think his tiktok name was 4doorsmorewhores)

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I don't remember it all, but it seems to me the gooks did a better job in the Rodney King riots. There was that one gook who seemed to shoot randomly, but I did see a lot of the Koreans just protecting their own store. At one point, there was over two dozen in front of one store to fend off the coloreds. They weren't pulling a Rittenhouse-Zimmerman, acting like they're above it all.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Kyle actually had a lot of medical training, he was also a lifeguard. He is going to school to become a nurse. He was offering first aid, there are multiple videos of him giving first aid to rioters who had been injured throughout the night. He was going around yelling "EMT, who needs medical?!" all night.

It also turns out he is pro-BLM, to the extent that he supports some of their legitimate causes and peaceful protesting to further those causes.

Yes, I'm sure he knows CPR and mouth-to-mouth, but what aid was he giving? Got any videos? What's a lot of medical training?

I saw him wearing gloves while walking around. You put on the gloves right before giving aid; you don't wear them whilst walking around. That tells me he is phony or doesn't know what he's doing. Prolly both.

[dannno]

there was over two dozen in front of one store to fend off the coloreds. They weren't pulling a Rittenhouse-Zimmerman, acting like they're above it all.

I don't think you know much of the details on the Rittenhouse case... he was also on video de escalating several situations between some of the other people carrying guns to protect the stores and the rioters.

There were actually upwards of 100 people there carrying rifles to help protect the properties, Kyle was just one of them.

Rosenbaum threatened to kill him twice and said if he caught any of them alone he would kill him, and also told them that he would cut their heart out. He just happened to see Kyle alone later in the night, and started chasing him.

[dannno]

Yes, I'm sure he knows CPR and mouth-to-mouth, but what aid was he giving? Got any videos? What's a lot of medical training?

I saw him wearing gloves while walking around. You put on the gloves right before giving aid; you don't wear them whilst walking around. That tells me he is phony or doesn't know what he's doing. Prolly both.

He had his medkit with him, he was carrying it around all night.. The videos of him giving aid were all in the trial, at least one was taken by independent journalist Richie McGinnes who also testified. He was a witness for the state, because he ran toward Rosenbaum before the shooting and they charged that Kyle endangered his life. However, Richie's testimony ended up playing a huge role in Kyle's acquittal, because he saw Rosenbaum attempt to grab his gun.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I don't think you know much of the details on the Rittenhouse case... he was also on video de escalating several situations between some of the other people carrying guns to protect the stores and the rioters.

There were actually upwards of 100 people there carrying rifles to help protect the properties, Kyle was just one of them.

Rosenbaum threatened to kill him twice and said if he caught any of them alone he would kill him, and also told them that he would cut their heart out. He just happened to see Kyle alone later in the night, and started chasing him.

No, I don't know all the details. I generally watch raw video. If you have some raw video of Ritten de-escalating or giving aid, then I'd like to see it. I also have not seen 100 rifles and would appreciate seeing video.

I found out later Rosenbaum was a pedo. He looks like a hothead and I'm not surprised he got shot.

Rittenhouse looks exactly like the bootlicker who turns into the cop so many used to bemoan here, but now seemed to have changed their tune.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

He had his medkit with him, he was carrying it around all night.. The videos of him giving aid were all in the trial, at least one was taken by independent journalist Richie McGinnes who also testified. He was a witness for the state, because he ran toward Rosenbaum before the shooting and they charged that Kyle endangered his life. However, Richie's testimony ended up playing a huge role in Kyle's acquittal, because he saw Rosenbaum attempt to grab his gun.

So what; I have a med kit in my car trunk. I'd like to see those videos of him giving aid. Yelling "EMT!" doesn't impress me.

[dannno]

No, I don't know all the details. I generally watch raw video. If you have some raw video of Ritten de-escalating or giving aid, then I'd like to see it. I also have not seen 100 rifles and would appreciate seeing video.

I found out later Rosenbaum was a pedo. He looks like a hothead and I'm not surprised he got shot.

Rittenhouse looks exactly like the bootlicker who turns into the cop so many used to bemoan here, but now seemed to have changed their tune.

I support the police insofar as they are protecting the rights and property of others.. those are justifiable actions.

Conversely, if cops raid somebody for growing cannabis, I don't see anything immoral about opening fire on them. Is it wise? No. Is it legal? No. But I don't have any moral qualms with it.

The videos of Kyle de escalating were also presented in trial. Richie McGinnes was following Kyle for a good portion of the night. He went on Tim Pool's show shortly after the incident happened and talked about how he was helping put out dumpster fires, including one that they were pushing toward a gas station which is what made Rosenbaum really upset.

Rosenbaum had just gotten out of jail, or mental ward, and went to his girlfriends' house and she told him he couldn't stay there. So he walked back downtown. He was going around all night yelling the n-word, and had not previously been apart of any BLM protests or anything.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I support the police insofar as they are protecting the rights and property of others.. those are justifiable actions.

Conversely, if cops raid somebody for growing cannabis, I don't see anything immoral about opening fire on them. Is it wise? No. Is it legal? No. But I don't have any moral qualms with it.

The videos of Kyle de escalating were also presented in trial. Richie McGinnes was following Kyle for a good portion of the night. He went on Tim Pool's show shortly after the incident happened and talked about how he was helping put out dumpster fires, including one that they were pushing toward a gas station which is what made Rosenbaum really upset.

Rosenbaum had just gotten out of jail, or mental ward, and went to his girlfriends' house and she told him he couldn't stay there. So he walked back downtown. He was going around all night yelling the n-word, and had not previously been apart of any BLM protests or anything.

An 18 year old punk kid isn't "de-escalating" anything. I won't believe anything about medical aid until I see raw video. I doubt if that substantially happened.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

All these cases seem to be the same. Martin was a punk and Zimmerman was liar. The better armed guy won.

Michael Brown needed a swift kick in his ass to set him straight, but Darren Wilson was another liar. The better armed guy won.

The lives of Zimmerman and Wilson went south after that. Who knows what will happen in Rittenhouse's life, but I don't really care.

[dannno]

An 18 year old punk kid isn't "de-escalating" anything. I won't believe anything about medical aid until I see raw video. I doubt if that substantially happened.

He was 17, and in the video the rioters were being confrontational with the gun toters in the parking lot. Kyle said some things to calm them down and the rioters walked away. I saw the video in the trial, can't find it on youtube.

He gave aid to at least two people, both of whom were rioters. He had a medkit and is on video going around asking if anybody needs aid. Not sure how this is a big point of contention.. there certainly isn't any video of somebody requesting aid from him and then not giving it.. in fact, he tried to provide aid to Rosenbaum after he shot him, but the mob started convening on him and yelling at people to get him.

[Ender]

Fvck no. Here's what you did NOT highlight.

McMichael testified that he pointed his gun at Arbery — saying his intent was to get him to back off — and Arbery then turned and ran around the passenger side.


So McMichael DID brandish his gun at Arbery. What's that all y'all had to say about Alec Baldwin? Don't point a gun at someone unless you intend to kill them? So McMichael brandished his gun at Arbery putting Arbery in reasonable fear of his life. If Arbery had been armed and shot McMichael that would have been self defense. I haven't read the statute, but if Kyle Rittenhouse and his buddies had chased Rosenberg down and Kyle had pointed his gun at Rosenberg before Rosenberg tried to take his gun, Kyle would be a convicted felon right now. That's Wisconsin law, not Georgia law, but I agree with the Wisconsin law from a moral standpoint.

Edit: I went back and read the code. The McMicheals had no right to point a gun at Arbery and the neigbor helping them had no right to strike him with his truck. Even police officers don't have a general right to use deadly force to apprehend a suspect.

(b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.

Using the RPF "standard" that's been applied to Alec Baldwin, pointing a gun at someone = intent to kill him. The McMichaels had no reason to believe Arbery was armed and when one of them pointed a gun at him and when their friend tried to run him over with his truck, Arbery hadn't done anything violent. Arbery only grabbed the gun in self defense.

Pretty much my POV.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

He was 17, and in the video the rioters were being confrontational with the gun toters in the parking lot. Kyle said some things to calm them down and the rioters walked away. I saw the video in the trial, can't find it on youtube.

He gave aid to at least two people, both of whom were rioters. He had a medkit and is on video going around asking if anybody needs aid. Not sure how this is a big point of contention.. there certainly isn't any video of somebody requesting aid from him and then not giving it.. in fact, he tried to provide aid to Rosenbaum after he shot him, but the mob started convening on him and yelling at people to get him.

I don't see Rittenhouse trying to give aid to Rosenbaum. He just circles around the car and goes back toward Rosenbaum. Is there anything else? How would you even know he's trying to give aid? How do you know he calms down rioters? There's no audio.

People say so much stupid crap about all of this. They either make stuff up and believe what some dumbass says on the internet. I'm not interested in news clips with select footage. Give me raw video.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

This is so retarded. I'm on a forum with a bunch of conservatives. These bootlickers are gushing like a bunch of homosexuals over a little piglet. They're just as bad as the clowns gushing over George Floyd and his Jesus statues.

[dannno]

I don't see Rittenhouse trying to give aid to Rosenbaum. He just circles around the car and goes back toward Rosenbaum. Is there anything else? How would you even know he's trying to give aid? How do you know he calms down rioters? There's no audio.

People say so much stupid crap about all of this. They either make stuff up and believe what some dumbass says on the internet. I'm not interested in news clips with select footage. Give me raw video.

Kyle walked around the car and spent a total of 23 seconds next to Rosenbaum before fleeing, Richie McGinnes immediately began giving him first aid. Kyle was on the horn calling the cops, after which he planned to help give him aid. Unfortunately his phone call was cut short by the mob.