The Next Trayvon Martin Case?

edub1309

Ronald Raygun
Belligerents
Minuteman
Apr 19, 2020
134
53
34
Northeast Ohio
If these guys were filmed chasing this guy down and shooting him in the back, we wouldn’t be here, but you can clearly see the gun wasn’t even point at him until HE grabbed it and drew it towards himself!
But why were they armed waiting for him? Why was a third person in a vehicle filming? Not a dash cam mind you. Everybody here should be accountable for their actions, not just Arberry. No confrontation=no shooting. Every single person played a part in this.
 

Rthur

Philomath
Belligerents
Apr 16, 2010
10,568
12,137
219
51
Not Chicago, Illinios
Sure. Policing is great. And the rule of law is great too. I’m all for busting burglars and other would be menaces. I don’t want them around my community either. But I also wouldn’t confront them on a road without witnessing a crime while armed based on nothing more than a description. Different strokes and all that I suppose.
This entire thread is mostly conjecture and preconceived bias.
Trial by public opinion isn't just for the media, it's doing just fine here as well.

R
 

Tokay444

I Will Not Comply.
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jun 24, 2019
773
817
99
But why were they armed waiting for him? Why was a third person in a vehicle filming? Not a dash cam mind you. Everybody here should be accountable for their actions, not just Arberry. No confrontation=no shooting. Every single person played a part in this.
It’s not illegal to be armed in Georgia.
 

SSG69

Private
Belligerents
Feb 7, 2007
154
214
49
Central IL
So you’ve never broken a law, right? Should you pay for that with your life? I mean common man, we’re still talking about a fucking human here. He wasn’t a terrorist. He wasn’t kidnapping and raping young girls. He AT WORST burglarized. So he deserves death? That callousness is just wrong, morally and otherwise.
What do you think was gonna happen if this cocksucker would have got control of that shotgun?? You “come on man”. Btw my wager still stands.
 

candyx

Private
Belligerents
Minuteman
Apr 6, 2014
2,131
3,575
219
Yes its not like the old days when they use to hang you for cattle raiding , criminals are now a protected class by the left today. Someone burglarizing a neighbors home I call 911. Someone crashes through my door to rob me then he accepts the risk of maybe not being able to leave vertically. Should burglary be punish by death no I guess but should we adopt the old Iranian method of cutting off hands so when you see a one handed man in your neighborhood you know right away what he's doing.
 

Longshot231

Major Hide Member
Belligerents
Minuteman
Mar 8, 2018
2,321
8,418
119
Yes its not like the old days when they use to hang you for cattle raiding , criminals are now a protected class by the left today. Someone burglarizing a neighbors home I call 911. Someone crashes through my door to rob me then he accepts the risk of maybe not being able to leave vertically. Should burglary be punish by death no I guess but should we adopt the old Iranian method of cutting off hands so when you see a one handed man in your neighborhood you know right away what he's doing.
I knew a gentleman who grew up in New Dehli. We had an interesting conversation about crime & justice here versus India. I will preface this with saying that I prefer our system to theirs.

Nevertheless, he told me a story which highlights the visceral reaction to crime that we all have to some extant or another.

When he was a boy, one of his neighbors came home and caught a burglar in their house. The family managed to keep the burglar from escaping and went to work on not only his face but his entire body.

The shouting and commotion drew the attention of the other neighbors who came to the aid of the burglary victims. My friend told me a couple hundred people took part in the beating. He told me that what he saw didn't resemble a human being but raw, cut up meat. The burglar was begging for someone to call the police to arrest him.

When his rescuers came they took him to jail where he would be safe from his victims.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deersniper

rth1800

Two Star General
Belligerents
Sep 16, 2009
6,799
2,702
219
If the black community and their white mouthpieces actually cared about saving black lives they would use all of these police and other shootings of young blacks as training films.

“This is what gets you killed”

“Stopping when confronted with a gun saves your life.”

“If you do this bad things can happen DUE TO YOUR ACTIONS. “

Sadly, none of this is about saving lives, it is about the culture of victimhood and winning the ghetto lotto.

It’s about supporting lawlessness and the ghetto culture. It’s about supporting the “WTF are you gonna going to do about it attitude?”

In this case the question was answered.
 

Jrb572

Full Member
Belligerents
Dec 7, 2008
1,548
118
169
St. Charles Missouri
I hate seeing anything about what happened here. It was media an DOJ that let the police and the community here hang out to dry over something that never happened the way they made out that it happened. Funny how it took the DOJ three time to finally say something after being forced to by a certain president at the time. Now they try to make these protestors here out to be heroes. From my experience here don’t believe what you are being force feed. There was so many fake news stories. What happened here is why way before Trump came along made me call it fake news.
 

Jrb572

Full Member
Belligerents
Dec 7, 2008
1,548
118
169
St. Charles Missouri
Biggest mistake here also was they let his buddy on TV with the bullshit narrative of hands up don’t shoot. Was a proven lie. The funny thing was no problems were had with the protest until the cameras were running. I use to live a mile from where that happened. People were lead to believe they burnt the town down. I had friends from out of town take them around to only hear the repeat of this is it? The news made it sound way worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tokay444

NY700

Sergeant
Online Training Access
Belligerents
May 23, 2009
667
101
49
Dallas
He wasn’t detained. It seems you’re watching a different video than anyone else.
please highlight the frames where he was being detained.
If your wife is detained on the suspicion of stealing lipstick and fights for someone’s gun and gets herself shot, she’s as stupid as it gets.
the defendant has stated that his intent was to apply a citizens arrest upon the victim. The intent was to detain

now you see the jogger on the left side of the road. Truck on the right. An individual in the back of the truck and individual outside the truck on the left side of the road. The camera angle breaks and scans far to the right losing sight of the participants and then comes back left to see the jogger swerve to the right going around the truck on the right than engaging the individual having come around the front of the truck

now there is the video and there is the statements the participants have provided. The statement includes they were looking for the person involved in the home burglaries. The jogger fit the description. The description is black male. That’s it. They didn’t have a photo or a mug shot. No description of clothing no birthmark or tattoo. Black male

that city is 25% African America. Figure half of that is male. Since most people aren’t good at judging age certainly at a distance that means in this small town of 80,000 people about 5,000 fit that description. And here comes one jogging down the street.

we didn’t see him do anything. We don’t know him personally and we haven’t identified him. He fits the discription of 1 in 8. We are under no authority. We have not be deputized or askedby any authority to do a damn thing.

we admit our intent is to arrest this person. We are armed. We do not identify our selves as a swarm officer under any official doctrine because we don’t have one. And we are going to arrest an individual.
That individual does not willingly submit to our attempt at arresting them.

and they end up dead

1st degree murder no
Probably not second degree either

manslaughter probably
 

jakelly

Sergeant
Belligerents
Dec 31, 2011
1,053
423
189
40
Norman, OK
the defendant has stated that his intent was to apply a citizens arrest upon the victim. The intent was to detain

now you see the jogger on the left side of the road. Truck on the right. An individual in the back of the truck and individual outside the truck on the left side of the road. The camera angle breaks and scans far to the right losing sight of the participants and then comes back left to see the jogger swerve to the right going around the truck on the right than engaging the individual having come around the front of the truck

now there is the video and there is the statements the participants have provided. The statement includes they were looking for the person involved in the home burglaries. The jogger fit the description. The description is black male. That’s it. They didn’t have a photo or a mug shot. No description of clothing no birthmark or tattoo. Black male

that city is 25% African America. Figure half of that is male. Since most people aren’t good at judging age certainly at a distance that means in this small town of 80,000 people about 5,000 fit that description. And here comes one jogging down the street.

we didn’t see him do anything. We don’t know him personally and we haven’t identified him. He fits the discription of 1 in 8. We are under no authority. We have not be deputized or askedby any authority to do a damn thing.

we admit our intent is to arrest this person. We are armed. We do not identify our selves as a swarm officer under any official doctrine because we don’t have one. And we are going to arrest an individual.
That individual does not willingly submit to our attempt at arresting them.

and they end up dead

1st degree murder no
Probably not second degree either

manslaughter probably
The defendants didn’t say they attempted citizens’ arrest. They wanted to ask him some questions. They said, “Hey, we want to ask you some questions.”

Even if they had attempted a citizen’s arrest, they were within the letter of GA law.

In your retelling you omit the fact that Arbery turned 90* left and rushed Travis at the front of the truck.

There are no degrees of murder in Georgia. There is only murder (like first degree murder). The prosecution recognizes the shooting, as a stand alone event, was justified by self defense or accidental. That’s why they are charging the case the way they are. Travis- Aggravated assault extending to felony murder. GregAiding and abetting aggravated assault extending to felony murder. The prosecution is going to have to prove some type of threat on the McMichaels’ part. Because the father wasn’t directly charged and the son was, and because the shouting likely came more from the father in the bed, and less from the son in the cab, the threat, as the prosecution seems to be establishing it, will be carrying the gun. It seems to me they’re going to have to try to prove brandishing. But the video clearly shows Travis McMichael NOT pointing the gun at Arbery, NOT waiving it angrily, and NOT yelling threats at Avery. It’s a pretty weak case.
 

Tokay444

I Will Not Comply.
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jun 24, 2019
773
817
99
the defendant has stated that his intent was to apply a citizens arrest upon the victim. The intent was to detain And that clearly hadn’t happened. When you’re detained, can you still be, “out for a jog”?

now you see the jogger on the left side of the road. Truck on the right. An individual in the back of the truck and individual outside the truck on the left side of the road. The camera angle breaks and scans far to the right losing sight of the participants and then comes back left to see the jogger swerve to the right going around the truck on the right than engaging the individual having come around the front of the truck Yes.

now there is the video and there is the statements the participants have provided. The statement includes they were looking for the person involved in the home burglaries. The jogger fit the description. The description is black male. That’s it. They didn’t have a photo or a mug shot. No description of clothing no birthmark or tattoo. Black male You keep referring to him as, “The Jogger”. It really discredits your posts of any and all validity. He wasn’t a jogger. He was a burglar. We have that from multiple camera angles and a positive ID from a family member, as well as priors and a mug shot, but again, almost all of that is irrelevant. He grabbed a gun and pulled it at himself.

that city is 25% African America. Figure half of that is male. Since most people aren’t good at judging age certainly at a distance that means in this small town of 80,000 people about 5,000 fit that description. And here comes one jogging down the street. We have that from multiple camera angles and a positive ID from a family member, as well as priors and a mug shot, but again, almost all of that is irrelevant. He grabbed a gun and pulled it at himself.

we didn’t see him do anything. We don’t know him personally and we haven’t identified him. He fits the discription of 1 in 8. We are under no authority. We have not be deputized or askedby any authority to do a damn thing.
All of that is irrelevant. He grabbed a gun and pulled it at himself. Local PD had enlisted the help of these men over the string of recent break-ins and trespasses.

we admit our intent is to arrest this person. We are armed. We do not identify our selves as a swarm officer under any official doctrine because we don’t have one. And we are going to arrest an individual.
That individual does not willingly submit to our attempt at arresting them. There is no decipherable audio in the video. You don’t know what they identified themselves as. All of that is irrelevant. He grabbed a gun and pulled it at himself.

and they end up dead Yes.

1st degree murder no
Probably not second degree either

manslaughter probably Doubtful. He grabbed a gun and pulled it at himself.
Most they see is (attempted) unlawful detention.
 

acudaowner

Old Salt
Belligerents
Minuteman
Dec 26, 2018
2,579
1,539
119
not sure if its relevant but sticking ones nose in others business always makes that person look like a dik so in that way maybe it is sort of relevant
 

Gunfighter14e2

Rusty Nail
Belligerents
Jul 9, 2002
7,481
9,624
219
Alabama
eHam.net
But the question still remains,....was he just starting turning his life around? I think not.
I'm thinking when you dig into his back-round you will see a pattern of typical small time punk behavior,....Hey bet there's some good shit in that place I can steal & sell, trespassing don't mean M/F'in shit,... no it don't,... unless your NOT the ghost you think you are.
Though-action-reaction,... kick the dog long enough, and at some point the dog will bite.
 

Tokay444

I Will Not Comply.
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jun 24, 2019
773
817
99
But the question still remains,....was he just starting turning his life around? I think not.
I'm thinking when you dig into his back-round you will see a pattern of typical small time punk behavior,....Hey bet there's some good shit in that place I can steal & sell, trespassing don't mean M/F'in shit,... no it don't,... unless your NOT the ghost you think you are.
Though-action-reaction,... kick the dog long enough, and at some point the dog will bite.
Sees a gun he just has to have. Doesn’t matter that it’s someone else’s. It that they’re holding it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rth1800

Ravenworks

Semper-Fi "80-84"
Belligerents
Minuteman
Feb 8, 2019
1,701
2,198
119
North Coast
It just keeps getting better-


New video shows Ahmaud Arbery chased for 4 minutes by father and son who shot him: lawyer
 

Tokay444

I Will Not Comply.
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jun 24, 2019
773
817
99
LOL! How the fuck are they actually still calling him a jogger?
 

SN13

Sergeant
Belligerents
Feb 26, 2009
182
48
34
36
West Palm Beach, FL
If you're the Lawyer for Arbery's family, and you have a 4 minute video showing him being chased by the Shooters, why hasn't it come out?

Three answers:

1. It's so damning that you want to save it for the trial to really FUCK the bubbas.
2. It actually incriminates Arbery.
3. It actually corroborates the McMichael story.

I thought it strange that the video leaked picks up so far from the CCTV site. And he's running Back TOWARDS the McMichaels and a dead-end.

The only way out of this community is up Satilla Dr past Zellwood Drive...

Satilla.jpg
 

SN13

Sergeant
Belligerents
Feb 26, 2009
182
48
34
36
West Palm Beach, FL
I have not followed this one bit. So Was there a reason he turned around?
No one knows.

I'm just piecing together what we do know.

1. He started at the construction site (Satilla Drive) and ran south... I think the CCTV from across the street shows him booking it out to the left of the screen (south).
2. We see the video of the shooting showing him running south around a slight bend to the left and into the truck at the intersection. (Street view vs. video place them on Holmes Road)

We have NO idea what path he actually took.

This is only conjecture based on starting position & direction, vs ending position/direction.... For all we know he could have ran through the woods/yards.

The Yellow path is about 2000 ft. and you'd be moving at 8ft/s if you took 4 minutes to move that path. (5mph) a nice "jogging" 12min mile pace.
 

E. Bryant

Gearhead
Belligerents
Oct 25, 2010
2,247
1,457
219
MI

Tokay444

I Will Not Comply.
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jun 24, 2019
773
817
99
But was Arbrey guilty of trespass?


Simply walking into the home under construction does not make him guilty of that crime. Also, it's not a felony, which changes the standard for citizen's arrest.
It was a dwelling under renovation. Not a home under construction. That’s trespass.
Edit. It’s actually felony burglary. Clear cut and dry. Legal grounds for citizens arrest.
 
Last edited:

E. Bryant

Gearhead
Belligerents
Oct 25, 2010
2,247
1,457
219
MI
It was a dwelling under renovation. Not a home under construction. That’s trespass.
Where in the applicable Georgia code does it distinguish between the two? There has been no evidence presented so far that Arbery committed a crime while on the property, or refused to leave when requested. If such evidence exists, then it can and should be presented in a court of law, although it may not exonerate the defendants since the powers of citizen's arrest are different for misdemeanors vs. felonies.
 

rth1800

Two Star General
Belligerents
Sep 16, 2009
6,799
2,702
219
The social justice warriors like simple catchy phrases. Easier to remember for those challenged with memory I suppose.
Here it is.

DON'T TUG THE TWO ROW.

:):)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ravenworks

Tokay444

I Will Not Comply.
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jun 24, 2019
773
817
99
Where in the applicable Georgia code does it distinguish between the two? There has been no evidence presented so far that Arbery committed a crime while on the property, or refused to leave when requested. If such evidence exists, then it can and should be presented in a court of law, although it may not exonerate the defendants since the powers of citizen's arrest are different for misdemeanors vs. felonies.
I believe it was mentioned earlier in this thread earlier that in the same video his grandmother identifies him in the dwelling, he can be seen in commission of theft. I will re-read the Georgia code, but I’m certain dwelling makes all the difference.
 

Dthomas3523

Hall Monitor
Staff member
Hessian
Commercial Supporter
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Jan 31, 2018
7,556
8,571
119
South Texas
Where in the applicable Georgia code does it distinguish between the two? There has been no evidence presented so far that Arbery committed a crime while on the property, or refused to leave when requested. If such evidence exists, then it can and should be presented in a court of law, although it may not exonerate the defendants since the powers of citizen's arrest are different for misdemeanors vs. felonies.
Georgia defines burglary (felony) as the entering of a dwelling (occupied or not) with the intent to commit a crime.

A brand new construction is obviously not a dwelling. A house having the bathroom renovated obviously is a dwelling.

A current house undergoing a full remodel.....that’s gonna be interesting. If it requires a permit to be re-established before you can live in it, probably not a dwelling. If it doesn’t, probably a dwelling.

Normally, you could say the accused see the outside as a complete house and would be reasonable to assume it’s a dwelling. However, the accused have some prior knowledge that the house is being fully renovated an no one lives there.

So, the first part of this case will hinge on if this would be considered trespassing or burglary. There is an argument to be made for both.

If it’s reasonable for the two accused to believe it was a felony, we move into the probable cause portion. That will hinge on how well they can articulate why they had probable cause to arrest without the need for questioning the subject to further determine facts.

If it’s ruled they couldn’t have reasonably believed it was a felony, the state will then move to show why they were assaultive with the way they approached the subject which would cause him to attempt to defend himself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitchtitsbob

candyx

Private
Belligerents
Minuteman
Apr 6, 2014
2,131
3,575
219
Is it illegal to resist a citizen's arrest?
Use of force
In at least one state, a civilian may use reasonable force, including deadly force if reasonable, to prevent an escape from a lawful citizen's arrest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ravenworks

Dthomas3523

Hall Monitor
Staff member
Hessian
Commercial Supporter
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Jan 31, 2018
7,556
8,571
119
South Texas
Is it illegal to resist a citizen's arrest?
Use of force
In at least one state, a civilian may use reasonable force, including deadly force if reasonable, to prevent an escape from a lawful citizen's arrest.
If the arrest was for a felony in Ga, they can use reasonable force.

Which is why the distinction between burglary and trespass is going to be so important here.
 

Tokay444

I Will Not Comply.
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jun 24, 2019
773
817
99
Georgia defines burglary (felony) as the entering of a dwelling (occupied or not) with the intent to commit a crime.

A brand new construction is obviously not a dwelling. A house having the bathroom renovated obviously is a dwelling.

A current house undergoing a full remodel.....that’s gonna be interesting. If it requires a permit to be re-established before you can live in it, probably not a dwelling. If it doesn’t, probably a dwelling.

Normally, you could say the accused see the outside as a complete house and would be reasonable to assume it’s a dwelling. However, the accused have some prior knowledge that the house is being fully renovated an no one lives there.

So, the first part of this case will hinge on if this would be considered trespassing or burglary. There is an argument to be made for both.

If it’s reasonable for the two accused to believe it was a felony, we move into the probable cause portion. That will hinge on how well they can articulate why they had probable cause to arrest without the need for questioning the subject to further determine facts.

If it’s ruled they couldn’t have reasonably believed it was a felony, the state will then move to show why they were assaultive with the way they approached the subject which would cause him to attempt to defend himself.
The legal definition does not differentiate between constructed or under construction. The fact is, it is a house. Therefore it is a dwelling.
(1) “Dwelling” means any building, structure, or portion thereof which is designed or intended for occupancy for residential use.
By the definition, it could be framework only, but the design is intended for occupancy for residential use. Dwelling. Felony burglary.
 

Dthomas3523

Hall Monitor
Staff member
Hessian
Commercial Supporter
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Jan 31, 2018
7,556
8,571
119
South Texas
The legal definition does not differentiate between constructed or under construction. The fact is, it is a house. Therefore it is a dwelling.
(1) “Dwelling” means any building, structure, or portion thereof which is designed or intended for occupancy for residential use.
It’s absolutely not that simple. You’ll see once arguments during trial happen.

If he was alive and arrested for burglary, a defense attorney would pick apart the dwelling portion.

Just like the prosecuting attorneys will make a point these men knew the house was fully gutted and not “intended for occupancy” in its current form.
 

Tokay444

I Will Not Comply.
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jun 24, 2019
773
817
99
edited previous post.
The law quite clearly states it only needs to be designed for occupancy for residential use. It’s designed to be a house. There’s nothing left for interpretation there.
 

Dthomas3523

Hall Monitor
Staff member
Hessian
Commercial Supporter
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Jan 31, 2018
7,556
8,571
119
South Texas
edited previous post.
The law quite clearly states it only needs to be designed for occupancy for residential use. It’s designed to be a house. There’s nothing left for interpretation there.
Also wrong. There is always room for interpretation.

For example, a crack house can at times be considered a dwelling and other times considered not a dwelling. This is an important distinction for law enforcement. As they cannot enter a dwelling without permission or a warrant.

As per your argument, it’s always a dwelling because of the original status of the structure. This is simply not true at all. There are many many cases where houses have be ruled not a dwelling due to their current condition.

And typically, one of the biggest determining factor is the LEO’s prior knowledge and experience with that house. Just like a large factor here will be these two men’s knowledge of this house.

There’s almost never a “not open for interpretation” of a law. That’s literally what case law provides......interpretation of statutes.

Another prime example, the 2nd amendment is interpreted all the time by the court system. Which is why you can’t own a tank. You may not agree with it and say “shall not be infringed” is not open for interpretation, but it is in fact open for interpretation. Just like a “dwelling” can be interpreted differently.
 

Gunfighter14e2

Rusty Nail
Belligerents
Jul 9, 2002
7,481
9,624
219
Alabama
eHam.net
Another prime example, the 2nd amendment is interpreted all the time by the court system. Which is why you can’t own a tank.
That is 200% wrong. There are more than a few tanks in private hands an I know of 3 that are 100% live, all guns including main. How about a M35A1 gun truck with a quad 50 an two M60's. Don't try an count the Knee, 60 & 81mm mortars lives out there. Plus you have all the live towed shit as well. If you have the money an clean record you can own anything you want just ask Dick Chaney. Not many M50 Ontos around but enough 106mm RR's to fit more than a hand full if you come up with a hull.
 

Dthomas3523

Hall Monitor
Staff member
Hessian
Commercial Supporter
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Jan 31, 2018
7,556
8,571
119
South Texas
That is 200% wrong. There are more than a few tanks in private hands an I know of 3 that are 100% live, all guns including main. How about a M35A1 gun truck with a quad 50 an two M60's. Don't try an count the Knee, 60 & 81mm mortars lives out there. Plus you have all the live towed shit as well. If you have the money an clean record you can own anything you want just ask Dick Chaney. Not many M50 Ontos around but enough 106mm RR's to fit more than a hand full if you come up with a hull.
Again, which is my point. “Shall not be infringed” has been interpreted to mean sometimes, with tons of restrictions.

I’m sorry I didn’t put an aterisk next to it as I wrongly assumed people wouldn’t start nitpicking when the point was obviously about laws being interpreted.

If it makes you feel better, replace tank with nuclear warhead, cruise missile, or any other thing you want to replace it with.

If “shall not be infringed” wasn’t being interpreted, you’d be able to go to the store and buy an automatic rifle just like you can anything else.
 

E. Bryant

Gearhead
Belligerents
Oct 25, 2010
2,247
1,457
219
MI
You simply need to enter the dwelling without authorization to commit burglary, which is a felony, which is grounds for lawful citizen arrest.
Very interesting. So then why were we talking about "trespass" all this time?

Edit: I do not think your description matches the actual law. Both first and second degree charges require that the suspect enter the dwelling "without authority and with the intent to commit a felony or theft". So the "without authority" seems clear, but proving intent to steal is another matter altogether. It should be interesting to see how this one plays out in court.
 
Last edited: