What tv? I don't know nothing about no TV homeslice.
Posted on 05/19/2020 12:34:28 PM PDT by tlozo
Yes. He was offered a full scholarship to Princeton in the pre M.D. program.
A genius, and pure as the driven snow. That is why he was killed, trying to disarm a trigger happy KKK clan member.
Yes. He was offered a full scholarship to Princeton in the pre M.D. program.
A genius, and pure as the driven snow. That is why he was killed, trying to disarm a trigger happy KKK clan member. The actions of a good Samaritan, just trying to spread love around the world.
you’re cluelessly spewing the liberal position without knowing any facts.
arbery attacked McM and tried to take the gun. That’s all that matters.
Well, with monks the robes probably covered up their fashion faux pas most of the time...
Just a jogger.
Outcome of arrest is not clear:
He got off with a defense of high anziety & some other such mental nonsense.
The father who was involved in the shooting was involved in the shoplifting case & recognized jogger on sight.
What tv? I don't know nothing about no TV homeslice.
What did you or he expect when he physically attacked and clearly attempted to disarm a neighbor holding a shotgun? Was it expected that the neighbor just hand it over to someone the suspected as casing and or possibly burglarizing the neighborhood?
This is nothing! Every jogger has a plethora of unreleased security cam footage of various incidents, including trespassing, shoplifting, and belligerence in public parks. Nothing burger.
Or wanted to drink from a hose.
All those documents are now DELETED. Saint Arbery Protection Society (SAPS0 in action?
The situation got away from them? I guess that's the nice way to say the, "Jogger" went out of his way to physically attack and attempted to disarm the neighbor!
Say what? The cops asked a question about a stolen TV and got a Butterfly McQueen answer? Oh, this was in Georgia? That figures.
The Gentle Jogger, Saint Skitters
That yahoo defense team sure is busy trying to corrupt the potential jury pool.........
I don’t see any evidence of any illegal activity on anyone’s part before the confrontation. Arbery may have been looking to burglarize the construction site, but he didn’t actually do so. And there’s nothing illegal about asking someone what they’re doing out in public regardless of whether you suspect they’ve committed a crime or not.
The crux of this whole issue lies in what took place during the confrontation. Was Abery aggressive? Maybe; maybe not. We don’t know. We have one side of a story and video from a distance and a bad angle with a truck in the way that was apparently recorded using a potatoe. Was this an innocent misunderstanding? Maybe, maybe not, we weren’t there. Did the McMichaels confront Arbery with ill or hostile intent? No idea, I can’t look inside their heads and we don’t have any real evidence either way. Again, we have their side of the story and we have a guy who’s dead and we have a video that was apparently shot with the same camera that gave us the Zapruder film.
That’s why I think a trial is absolutely warranted here: we know a man is dead, but we don’t know exactly why. We have the stories of the McMichaels, but no clear and obvious evidence (like a clear video of the confrontation from start to finish with clear audio) to tell us who had what intent, who was provocative or aggressive, and who may have had the better claim to self defense. I can sit here and say that if I were lawfully holding a firearm and someone tried to snatch it away from me, I would certainly defend myself. I can also say that if I found myself unexpectedly faced with someone who was armed and I firmly believed (based on their demeanor, words, body language, etc.) that they were about to kill me with it, I would be doing everything I could to take it from them to prevent that. The video we have doesn’t tell us nearly enough about this situation to provide a clear case of self defense, so we need a trial.
The purpose of a trial is to lay out all the available evidence and see whether one or both of the McMichaels are guilty of any criminal action beyond a reasonable doubt. With what we have in front of us today, we don’t know that they’re guilty of anything and we don’t know they’re innocent either. A trial is the best way to establish the facts and apply the law. If the state can’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the McMichaels violated Georgia law, they should walk.
By the way, there’s a pretty good breakdown of the video we do have of the confrontation here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywenRJU0qdE
I think you’ve laid out the situation quite well.
No, to me it looks like they challenged him. He wasn’t a neighbor...neither of them lived there. Then he got scared because of the shotgun and tried to get it away from them. Also, they had a history and he had had run-ins with the older man (the father).
In any case, it was an accident that he got shot, but they shouldn’t have been doing this armed patrol on their own initiative anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.