Ahmaud Arbery; racist killing and attempted cover up.

[MaxVel]

Senior McMichael confessed to this at the moment of arrest. This is all in the testimony he delivered that I've been referring to. https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthel...mized/full.pdf

In this report Travis is the name of the son who was driving the vehicle, Roddy is the person in the other car. I'm posting this report (again).

Source: Glynn County Police Department - Public Release Incident Report for G20-11303

Upon my arrival I observed Officer Minshew(184) setting up a perimeter. I began speaking with Gregory McMichael who was a witness to the incident. McMichael stated there have been several Break-ins in the neighborhood and further the suspect was caught on surveillance video. McMichael stated he was in his frontyard and saw the suspect from the break-ins "haulingass" down Satilla Drive toward Burford Drive. McMichael stated he then ran inside his house and called to Travis(McMichael) and said "Travis the guy is running down the street lets go". McMichael stated he went to his bedroom and grabbed his .357. Magnum and Travis grabbed his shotgun because they "didn't know if the male was armed or not". McMichael stated "the other night" they saw the same male and he stuck his hand down his pants which lead them to believe the male was armed.

McMichael stated he and Travis got in the truck and drove down Satilla Drive toward Burford Drive McMichael stated when they arrived at the intersection of Satilla Drive and Holmes Drive, they saw the unidentified male running down Burford drive McMichael then stated Travis drive down Burford and attempted to cut off the male. McMichael stated the unidentified male turned around and began running back the direction from which he came and "Roddy" attempted to block him which was unsuccessful Michael stated he then jumped in to the bed of the truck and he and Travis continued to Holmes in an attempt to intercept him.

© Copyright Original Source

Roddy was the other guy in a car. They both tried to cut off Arbery at which point Arbery changed direction and tried to flee from them.

This does not look like the action of some people who just wanted to ask questions, or simply wanted to see where he was going.

Not sure how else they were meant to get close enough to ask Arbery questions..?

'attempted to cut off' doesn't necessarily imply 'came into contact with' or even 'came very close to hitting' - so perhaps only Roddy/Bryan (?) came that close.



From the testimony it looks like there were only two attempts (one each, both unsuccessful) to cut off Arbery. Probably only the McMikes went past Arbery and tried to cut him off, Roddy was behind and tried when Arbery came running back.

Thanks Leonhard, this is helpful information. Also thanks for talking facts and info, and not attacking posters. It's a pleasant change.

[rogue06]

Senior McMichael confessed to this at the moment of arrest. This is all in the testimony he delivered that I've been referring to. https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthel...mized/full.pdf

In this report Travis is the name of the son who was driving the vehicle, Roddy is the person in the other car. I'm posting this report (again).

Source: Glynn County Police Department - Public Release Incident Report for G20-11303

Upon my arrival I observed Officer Minshew(184) setting up a perimeter. I began speaking with Gregory McMichael who was a witness to the incident. McMichael stated there have been several Break-ins in the neighborhood and further the suspect was caught on surveillance video. McMichael stated he was in his frontyard and saw the suspect from the break-ins "haulingass" down Satilla Drive toward Burford Drive. McMichael stated he then ran inside his house and called to Travis(McMichael) and said "Travis the guy is running down the street lets go". McMichael stated he went to his bedroom and grabbed his .357. Magnum and Travis grabbed his shotgun because they "didn't know if the male was armed or not". McMichael stated "the other night" they saw the same male and he stuck his hand down his pants which lead them to believe the male was armed.

McMichael stated he and Travis got in the truck and drove down Satilla Drive toward Burford Drive McMichael stated when they arrived at the intersection of Satilla Drive and Holmes Drive, they saw the unidentified male running down Burford drive McMichael then stated Travis drive down Burford and attempted to cut off the male. McMichael stated the unidentified male turned around and began running back the direction from which he came and "Roddy" attempted to block him which was unsuccessful Michael stated he then jumped in to the bed of the truck and he and Travis continued to Holmes in an attempt to intercept him.

© Copyright Original Source

Roddy was the other guy in a car. They both tried to cut off Arbery at which point Arbery changed direction and tried to flee from them.

This does not look like the action of some people who just wanted to ask questions, or simply wanted to see where he was going.

This and the fact that they thought that the video exonerated them (which is why McMichael asked his friend to release it to the press) indicates that they thought they were acting in a completely legal manner.

And this goes back to exactly what sort of authority did McMichael have after the local police told the homeowner to contact him in case of trouble on the property. What sort of authority did that grant him particularly wrt that specific property?

For an example those who have been deputized by the sheriff to assist in a specific case are granted authority not usually held by those outside of law enforcement. Now I'm not saying he was deputized (which usually involves a swearing in an issuing of an I.D. -- usually a badge -- for obvious reasons), but using this as an example of a level of temporary, conditional authority bestowed on civilians by the government.

[JimL]

This and the fact that they thought that the video exonerated them (which is why McMichael asked his friend to release it to the press) indicates that they thought they were acting in a completely legal manner.

And this goes back to exactly what sort of authority did McMichael have after the local police told the homeowner to contact him in case of trouble on the property. What sort of authority did that grant him particularly wrt that specific property?

For an example those who have been deputized by the sheriff to assist in a specific case are granted authority not usually held by those outside of law enforcement. Now I'm not saying he was deputized (which usually involves a swearing in an issuing of an I.D. -- usually a badge -- for obvious reasons), but using this as an example of a level of temporary, conditional authority bestowed on civilians by the government.

You have to stop with the McMichaels had the authority bit. The landlord already said he never spoke to the McMichaels.

[Mountain Man]

You have to stop with the McMichaels had the authority bit. The landlord already said he never spoke to the McMichaels.

Source?

[Mountain Man]

This and the fact that they thought that the video exonerated them (which is why McMichael asked his friend to release it to the press) indicates that they thought they were acting in a completely legal manner.

That in and of itself doesn't prove anything. They could think they were acting in a legal manner while still being in violation of the law. The question is whether or not their actions at any point actually did violate the law, and I have seen nothing definitive to that end.

[JimL]

Source?

Sheesh, how long have you been looking into this strory?

http://fox6now.com/2020/05/11/1386842/

"he never shared any of this information with the McMichaels, whom he didn't even know."

[Mountain Man]

Sheesh, how long have you been looking into this strory?

http://fox6now.com/2020/05/11/1386842/

"he never shared any of this information with the McMichaels, whom he didn't even know."

Calm down, Jimmy. I just asked if you had a source for you assertion, and to my surprise, you actually provided one, so thank you for that.

[Leonhard]

Just calling the police would 99+% likely have meant Arbery disappeared, end of story.

I would have been completely okay with that.

Grabbing for the gun was the single most dangerous thing he could have done.

We can both agree on that.

I can't find it in me to find much fault with people acting within the law, except to say that some of their choices were unwise at best.

It is probably no surprise to you to find that I am against civilians owning the kinds of weapons that the McMichaels were sporting, and/or using them outside anything other than a gun range. The closest we have to a law like that is if citizens spot a convicted felon who has escaped capture, or escaped prison. In that case and that case alone may a citizen perform a citizens arrest. And even then everyone is adviced not to.

I have a friend that on his motorcycle - delivery rider - hit and killed a man carrying a child, who was crossing the road. The light was green, going orange, the man ran out from behind a turning big truck at the lights. There was no pedestrian crossing there. An awful tragedy. Was my friend at fault? Legally, no. Morally, not really? Prudentially... he should have waited for the next green light.. maybe. Was the man at fault? Legally... maybe yes. Morally...?? Prudentially... yeah.

I have an uncle that got run over by a tractor. He'd gotten off his motorcycle, and was pushing it along, then out of left field there was a tractor all of the sudden and he got run over by the big tire. That was one of the best men on my mothers side too. However we never blamed the young man in the tractor, and I wouldn't either. His wife personally visited that young man and told him it wasn't his fault, and it was entirely an accident.

However, I can't in my mind view what happened there as accidental along that nature; They had guns, they were chasing him. That's intent, that's "If such and such happens, I will do what needs to be done" mentality. There had to be, at least remotely, the intent to use the guns they brought along. This can't be compared to someone driving across an intersection in the last split second of a greenlight, and someone coming out of left field.

The only parallel to that would be if the McMichaels had been at a gun range and were firing a few rounds and Arbery came out of left field into sight of their guns as they were shooting. No one would blame them for hitting Arbery in that instance. I wouldn't! But that's not what happened. There were no gun range, and this wasn't an accident decoupled from their choices. They chose to chase; They chose to keep pursuing; They chose to cut him off; They chose to get out of the car; etc...

There might be a point to whether there was a choice to fire. If it was on a hair trigger it might simply have gone off accidentally when Arbery grabbed it.

[Leonhard]

Their intent was to stop Arbery and detain him until police arrived.

I'm just countering MaxVel's point that (that he stated as an option earlier) they were simply following him to see where he was going. I think we've reached consensus that they weren't. They were definitely trying to stop him and perform their citizens arrest.

[Leonhard]

Not sure how else they were meant to get close enough to ask Arbery questions..?

They could just have seen what roads he was running down, so they could inform the police. Two to three hundred feet's distance.

'attempted to cut off' doesn't necessarily imply 'came into contact with' or even 'came very close to hitting' - so perhaps only Roddy/Bryan (?) came that close.

From the testimony it looks like there were only two attempts (one each, both unsuccessful) to cut off Arbery. Probably only the McMikes went past Arbery and tried to cut him off, Roddy was behind and tried when Arbery came running back.

Thanks Leonhard, this is helpful information. Also thanks for talking facts and info, and not attacking posters. It's a pleasant change.

It takes a lot before I accuse a poster of something. I prefer the new exchanges. I'm outraged at situations and systems, not at people who hold different views from me. At the end of the day this forum is completely irrelevant in any larger context of the things we discuss. The McMichaels won't be found guilty or acquitted based on what we write here. I'm here mostly for my own benefit, to get perspectives I couldn't easily get elsewhere.

And to hang out with old friends.

[oxmixmudd]

I would have been completely okay with that.



We can both agree on that.



It is probably no surprise to you to find that I am against civilians owning the kinds of weapons that the McMichaels were sporting, and/or using them outside anything other than a gun range. The closest we have to a law like that is if citizens spot a convicted felon who has escaped capture, or escaped prison. In that case and that case alone may a citizen perform a citizens arrest. And even then everyone is adviced not to.



I have an uncle that got run over by a tractor. He'd gotten off his motorcycle, and was pushing it along, then out of left field there was a tractor all of the sudden and he got run over by the big tire. That was one of the best men on my mothers side too. However we never blamed the young man in the tractor, and I wouldn't either. His wife personally visited that young man and told him it wasn't his fault, and it was entirely an accident.

However, I can't in my mind view what happened there as accidental along that nature; They had guns, they were chasing him. That's intent, that's "If such and such happens, I will do what needs to be done" mentality. There had to be, at least remotely, the intent to use the guns they brought along. This can't be compared to someone driving across an intersection in the last split second of a greenlight, and someone coming out of left field.

The only parallel to that would be if the McMichaels had been at a gun range and were firing a few rounds and Arbery came out of left field into sight of their guns as they were shooting. No one would blame them for hitting Arbery in that instance. I wouldn't! But that's not what happened. There were no gun range, and this wasn't an accident decoupled from their choices. They chose to chase; They chose to keep pursuing; They chose to cut him off; They chose to get out of the car; etc...

There might be a point to whether there was a choice to fire. If it was on a hair trigger it might simply have gone off accidentally when Arbery grabbed it.

You make good points. But while 1 shot could have been accidental, all three likely were not.

[Leonhard]

Sheesh, how long have you been looking into this strory?

http://fox6now.com/2020/05/11/1386842/

"he never shared any of this information with the McMichaels, whom he didn't even know."

This is very interesting, and it also agrees with the testimony of the senior McMichael, namely that he was only aware of the video recordings and hadn't been alerted by that guy. And in fact the video recordings they were aware of might not have had anything to do with the building that Arbery had trespassed in.

Though it is also possible that the police had a weird deal in place where the Senior McMichael (and his son Travis McMichael?) acted as a deputy. So the owner of that house might have called the police, who then might have called McMichael, though... something just keeps seeming off about their reasons for running after Arbery. What sort of evidence were they aware of? They talked about a string of burglaries in the neighborhood, but only one had been called in.

Still doesn't quite add up, but we don't have all the evidence at hand.

[Leonhard]

You make good points. But while 1 shot could have been accidental, all three likely were not.

It didn't help that Travis McMichael called the deceased a racial slur after he was done shooting.

[Charles]

The owner of a home under construction in the Georgia neighborhood where Ahmaud Arbery was killed says he had reported no crime after surveillance video seemed to show the young man on the property.

The February 23 footage, captured moments before Arbery's death, appears to show him looking around but never touching anything -- and eventually, walking away.

"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," Larry English, the homeowner, told CNN's Chris Cuomo on Tuesday night.

But no string of break-ins was reported in more than seven weeks prior to Arbery's death and there was only a burglary report after a gun was stolen from an unlocked vehicle in front of the McMichaels' home, police said.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/13/u...deo/index.html

[Mountain Man]

You make good points. But while 1 shot could have been accidental, all three likely were not.

On what basis do you make that assertion? They were wrestling for control of the gun, so it is possible and plausible that all three shots were accidental. From what I remember of the video, the fatal shot was fired as Arbery had his hand on the barrel of the shotgun and was yanking it towards himself while repeatedly punching the younger McMichael in the head who was attempting to dodge the blows, and after the shot was fired and Arbery stopped his attack, the younger McMichael immediately lowered the weapon and backed away.