Why isn’t the media talking about the Ahmaud Arbery case more?

[redneckbmxer24]

I don’t get it.

3 bubbas chase down and attempt to arrest a black dude that they thought might have been stealing and kill him in the process, and it’s mostly crickets, but Rittenhouse is all they could talk about for weeks during the trial and now afterwards.

Nothing has come across my apple news on the phone, despite getting several a day on the Rittenhouse trial. Also haven’t seen anything on the news until this morning and it was brief.

 

[Anb618]

They know the defendants will very likely get convicted in the Arbery case. At least 2 of 3 (I don’t understand how the neighbor who just followed in his truck and filmed who had no contact with Arbery was even criminally charged. Maybe I missed something on that one). The father/son didn’t have anything close to a reasonable belief that Arbery was committing a crime, they tried to detain him at gunpoint, and Arbery got shot trying to defend himself. No public anger/racial tension to be gained by talking about a trial with a known conclusion that doesn’t support the MSM’s agenda.

 

[Fig]

Yea, I don't think that one guy should have taken the stand. He pretty much pulled a Grosskreutz and admitted to murder from what I heard.

 

[JbBooks]

They know the defendants will very likely get convicted in the Arbery case. At least 2 of 3 (I don’t understand how the neighbor who just followed in his truck and filmed who had no contact with Arbery was even criminally charged. Maybe I missed something on that one). The father/son didn’t have anything close to a reasonable belief that Arbery was committing a crime, they tried to detain him at gunpoint, and Arbery got shot trying to defend himself. No public anger/racial tension to be gained by talking about a trial with a known conclusion that doesn’t support the MSM’s agenda.

He didn’t get killed trying to defend himself, he got killed by trying to take someone’s weapon away from them, who in their right mind would grab a shotgun, barrel first and try to jerk it out of someone’s hands, if he had just waited for the police he would still be alive, but for some reason that wasn’t a good idea in his mind.

 

[Anb618]

He didn’t get killed trying to defend himself, he got killed by trying to take someone’s weapon away from them, who in their right mind would grab a shotgun, barrel first and try to jerk it out of someone’s hands, if he had just waited for the police he would still be alive, but for some reason that wasn’t a good idea in his mind.

Was there a lawful reason for a firearm to be pointed at Arbery? His unsuccessful actions after a firearm was pointed at him don’t change the fact that he was the only one acting lawfully in that moment. Private citizens cannot detain people when they aren’t SURE that person has committed a crime. Unfortunately, Papa forgot he wasn’t LE anymore. Suspicion of a crime wasn’t enough to be pointing firearms at people. Was it smart for Arbery to grab the gun? Maybe, maybe not. If it had ended with a successful disarm, we’d be saying that luck beats skill sometimes.

You can’t call Rittenhouse’s actions self defense, but not this. That’s my opinion.
Both had firearms pointed at them unlawfully. Each had a very different outcome. Kyle’s story end’s well (once he gets his MSM lawsuit(s) filed and decided), and Arbery’s story ended in a puddle of blood.

 

[Charger442]

Was it smart for Arbery to grab the gun?

the answer to this is always "No". an unarmed, untrained person trying to disarm an ARMED, untrained person.

Now, i get that a last ditch effort in a case where you are going to be executed may be your last and only option. but it sounds like those guys were trying to detain him for the cops, they didnt set out to kill him initially.

That doesnt make what they did right at all and all 3 are going to get convicted of murder because they are stupid, but if Arbury hadnt grabbed the gun, he would still be alive. i cant imagine a scenario where he thinks thats a good idea. watched too many movies, maybe?

 

[KZP]

The propaganda narrative is that no white person is ever put in prison for oppressing "people of color". No benefit to their revolution cries if the courts successfully prosecute this case. MSM would prefer this case result in acquittal so they can keep the propaganda machine pumping. If the jury does acquit, this will be the story for years.

 

[Anb618]

the answer to this is always "No". an unarmed, untrained person trying to disarm an ARMED, untrained person.

Now, i get that a last ditch effort in a case where you are going to be executed may be your last and only option. but it sounds like those guys were trying to detain him for the cops, they didnt set out to kill him initially.

That doesnt make what they did right at all and all 3 are going to get convicted of murder because they are stupid, but if Arbury hadnt grabbed the gun, he would still be alive. i cant imagine a scenario where he thinks thats a good idea. watched too many movies, maybe?

For sure. It wasn’t smart. Untrained people do stupid things under threat of death. Just saying it’s still self defense, even when it’s poorly executed self defense…

 

[MtnCreek]

That's one dumb jogger!

 

[Charger442]

For sure. It wasn’t smart. Untrained people do stupid things under threat of death. Just saying it’s still self defense, even when it’s poorly executed self defense…

self-defense should be that you are trying to avoid getting shot. Full frontal attack on a long gun, which is lawful in this scenario, is not in the attackers best interest of not getting shot.

again, there are some things you can do and there are things you should NOT do. if self-preservation was your goal, i dont think his actions were a good move.

 

[Inifinty]

DA in Chicago would have let the entire thing go on grounds of mutual combat.

If they did point and threaten with shotguns then the common sense lesson here is don't level the bang stick at someone unless you have a forcible felony in progress that needs stopping.

 

[Greasly]

The Rittenhouse trial came about from an incident that occurred after plenty of media coverage of protests and riots in a city. Massive video footage including drone footage. The other case essentially involved four people and one video on a single street. All the hard work and attention grabbing crap was done for the MSM in the Rittenhouse case. In other words, it's easy for a lazy media to make it a big story.

 

[Tokay444]

Was there a lawful reason for a firearm to be pointed at Arbery? His unsuccessful actions after a firearm was pointed at him don’t change the fact that he was the only one acting lawfully in that moment. Private citizens cannot detain people when they aren’t SURE that person has committed a crime. Unfortunately, Papa forgot he wasn’t LE anymore. Suspicion of a crime wasn’t enough to be pointing firearms at people. Was it smart for Arbery to grab the gun? Maybe, maybe not. If it had ended with a successful disarm, we’d be saying that luck beats skill sometimes.

You can’t call Rittenhouse’s actions self defense, but not this. That’s my opinion.
Both had firearms pointed at them unlawfully. Each had a very different outcome. Kyle’s story end’s well (once he gets his MSM lawsuit(s) filed and decided), and Arbery’s story ended in a puddle of blood.

It wasn’t pointed at him until he grabbed it.

 

[woogie_man]

There are reports that the individual shot had been caught before stealing from the same property. Come down to a thug getting caught, and instead of stopping he wanted to fight. So don't fight someone with a gun.

Stupid game played and this moron got his stupid prize.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

He didn’t get killed trying to defend himself, he got killed by trying to take someone’s weapon away from them, who in their right mind would grab a shotgun, barrel first and try to jerk it out of someone’s hands, if he had just waited for the police he would still be alive, but for some reason that wasn’t a good idea in his mind.

Really, you’re on a gun forum, likely pro gun, likely carry one for self defense and you can’t wrap your head around why someone would choose to try to defend themselves vs waiting for the police?

LOL

He had every right to defend himself and they had no right to try to detain him.

The bubbas are guilty of manslaughter at the very least and it’s not his fault that he chose to defend himself.

 

[dragman]

There are reports that the individual shot had been caught before stealing from the same property. Come down to a thug getting caught, and instead of stopping he wanted to fight. So don't fight someone with a gun.

Stupid game played and this moron got his stupid prize.

1 - He didn't have anything and was caught doing nothing but jogging that day.
2 - The act of trying to detain him in this situation is completely illegal
3 - All 3 chased and kept cutting him off. Them starting to chase and corner him is why they are all 3 guilty. If Arbery was me I would have been Kyle defending my actions on shooting 3 retards who were trying to kill me.

 

[Docsherm]

1 - He didn't have anything and was caught doing nothing but jogging that day.
2 - The act of trying to detain him in this situation is completely illegal
3 - All 3 chased and kept cutting him off. Them starting to chase and corner him is why they are all 3 guilty. If Arbery was me I would have been Kyle defending my actions on shooting 3 retards who were trying to kill me.

Let me guess, you got your information from the media.........

 

[Anb618]

It wasn’t pointed at him until he grabbed it.

Ahh yes. Staunch 2A proponents arguing that a gun in the hand of a person (who is already acting unlawfully) isn’t a deadly threat until said gun is pointed at you. Got it.
Glad to see intellectual consistency on this one…

 

[dragman]

Let me guess, you got your information from the media.........

I have been watching this case for over a year.
What did I say that isn't true.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Let me guess, you got your information from the media.........

If you’ve got something that says otherwise you’re welcome to post up the proof.

 

[GreenGO Juan]

Was there a lawful reason for a firearm to be pointed at Arbery? His unsuccessful actions after a firearm was pointed at him don’t change the fact that he was the only one acting lawfully in that moment. Private citizens cannot detain people when they aren’t SURE that person has committed a crime. Unfortunately, Papa forgot he wasn’t LE anymore. Suspicion of a crime wasn’t enough to be pointing firearms at people. Was it smart for Arbery to grab the gun? Maybe, maybe not. If it had ended with a successful disarm, we’d be saying that luck beats skill sometimes.

You can’t call Rittenhouse’s actions self defense, but not this. That’s my opinion.
Both had firearms pointed at them unlawfully. Each had a very different outcome. Kyle’s story end’s well (once he gets his MSM lawsuit(s) filed and decided), and Arbery’s story ended in a puddle of blood.

I dis agree.

That neighborhood was having issues with repeated theft, the police knew there were theft issues. In fact the McMicheals, armed with firearms, helped a uniformed officer clear the house after being called out. Two firearms were stolen about 2 weeks prior, the police warned the community the “person of interest” was armed and dangerous.

And yes if a crime is believed to be in progress of which there is a ton of evidence pointing that direction in Georgia they can make a citizens arrest. That is being argued by the defense.

I don’t think they are guilty of murder, or false imprisonment, etc. They were trying to conduct a lawful citizens arrest.

This, IMO is a perfect example of what is needed in this country to combat crime. People should not be punished for protecting their community.

Its green lighting the criminals that they can steal and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. Fuck That!!

If Aubrey was innocent... why did he run and fight. Because his intent was not on the right side, thats why.

Fyi, If you’re grabbing the dangerous end of a shotgun you better know what the hell you’re doing.

 

[kthomas]

From what I've heard/read, this is going to be a pretty clear cut case for homicide.

The actions of the citizens performing an arrest was unlawful, considering the letter of the law in Georgia.

 

[kthomas]

He didn’t get killed trying to defend himself, he got killed by trying to take someone’s weapon away from them, who in their right mind would grab a shotgun, barrel first and try to jerk it out of someone’s hands, if he had just waited for the police he would still be alive, but for some reason that wasn’t a good idea in his mind.

I don't think many here would take too kindly to being unlawfully detained by random citizens with firearms.

 

[GreenGO Juan]

 

[kthomas]

View attachment 7745750

Doesn't seem like the "arrestors" were in the presence or immediate knowledge of a crime.

 

[dragman]

View attachment 7745750

Well you proved my point. They didn't witness it! They only had the knowledge that something happened and he looked suspicious. If they caught him IN the home committing a felony they could then do a citizens arrest. They didn't they are COOKED

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

So if the now dead guy would have been carrying a firearm and shot the 3 guys that literally chased him down and drew their firearm....
Should he be charged with murder?
IF the answer to that is a NO; then by default the other guys have to be guilty of killing him right?

I remember seeing a verdict about a case like that somewhere......

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[Doctorwho1138]

I have been following this trial somewhat but based on what I have heard, these two are guilty at a minimum manslaughter.

 

[GreenGO Juan]

Doesn't seem like the "arrestors" were in the presence or immediate knowledge of a crime.

Yes they did they were aware of prior incidents, Like having twofirearm stolen from a vehicle, then him running away from the house, Matching the description of the same person that Had been seen multiple times I called that grounds for suspicion

Hi,

So if the now dead guy would have been carrying a firearm and shot the 3 guys that literally chased him down and drew their firearm....
Should he be charged with murder?
IF the answer to that is a NO; then by default the other guys have to be guilty of killing him right?

I remember seeing a verdict about a case like that somewhere......

Sincerely,
Theis

But that’s not what happened, So quit trying to deflect with fairytales

 

[Pok]

Not a fan of the whole citizen's arrest thing. I'd consider them armed attackers if they were chasing me or mine.

Not my state though, not my laws

 

[jakelly]

Even if you just burgled a home?

 

[Pok]

Even if you just burgled a home?

I'm not going to threaten someone with death over stolen goods (other than guns because of the potential). If I witnessed someone fleeing after a murder or a rape is a different story.

I think it's been said however that they did not witness him steal, and he was found with no stolen goods?

ETA: meaning that their assumption under which they threatened this guy with death ( and followed through) was wrong?

 

[GreenGO Juan]

Yeah I don’t think most people would be putting themselves in Aubreys situation. I don’t think they would ever let it get to that point of guns and shootings. I’ve been on other peoples property before and had people come out with firearms and question me as ti what the fuck I was doing, I didn’t try to attack them.

Would like to think that most people in this forum when questioned about what they were doing at a house on a piece of property they didn’t own, would handle it civilly.

And I could see a manslaughter charge for the one who actually pulled the trigger, though I personally disagree with it, I could accept it. But I think trying to charge all three of them with murder is wrong .

 

[Supersubes]

I believe there was a court ruling that invalidated their claim that they were conducting a citizen’s arrest, as the crime they were detaining him for happened 11 days earlier. Pretty much means game over and convictions for all.

 

[MtnCreek]

They're likely to go to prison for doing a poor job of doing the right thing. Arbery was a thief and I'm glad he's dead. Wish someone had smoked him earlier in his criminal career. Locals were not going to prosecute; it would have been left at that if the dumbass hadn't decided to video it. Video released and the Natives Were Restless. Atlanta Yankees then decided to stick their nose in it and burn the three instead of letting Atlanta burn.

 

[kthomas]

Yes they did they were aware of prior incidents, Like having twofirearm stolen from a vehicle, then him running away from the house, Matching the description of the same person that Had been seen multiple times I called that grounds for suspicion

View attachment 7745757

But that’s not what happened, So quit trying to deflect with fairytales

Bring aware of prior incidents does not allow them to perform a citizens arrest, per the law.

 

[RUTGERS95]

more importantly is the black militia groups threatening violence outside the courthouse

 

[jakelly]

@Pok You don’t have to steal anything to commit burglary in Georgia, which is a felony. I think they knew and had evidence of the burglary.

They say they were trying to arrest him, and I think that hurts their case. If they made threatening statements, which I think I saw they did, that changes their case.

Initially, I thought this was an open and shut case of self defense. As more details have emerged, I think their chance of being found innocent are slim, we’ll see. I’m not investing anymore time into their case, but to answer @redneckbmxer24 OP. My guess is that the powers think the law will convict in this case, which doesn’t kindle much ire in weaponized populations. The utility of this case has been mined.

 

[Anb618]

@Pok You don’t have to steal anything to commit burglary in Georgia, which is a felony. I think they knew and had evidence of the burglary.

They say they were trying to arrest him, and I think that hurts their case. If they made threatening statements, which I think I saw they did, that changes their case.

Initially, I thought this was an open and shut case of self defense. As more details have emerged, I think their chance of being found innocent are slim, we’ll see. I’m not investing anymore time into their case, but to answer @redneckbmxer24 OP. My guess is that the powers think the law will convict in this case, which doesn’t kindle much ire in weaponized populations. The utility of this case has been mined.

What evidence pointed to felony burglary? As far as I’m aware, they saw a black dude walking off a neighbor’s property. Genuinely asking.

 

[GreenGO Juan]

Bring aware of prior incidents does not allow them to perform a citizens arrest, per the law.

They had reasonable suspicion. And thats the argument. Personally I feel their suspicion was justified.

You are aware they had firearms stolen from the property right. Like a week or two prior ?

It’s one of the reasons they armed them selves

 

[kthomas]

They had reasonable suspicion. And thats the argument. Personally I feel their suspicion was justified.

You are aware they had firearms stolen from the property right. Like a week or two prior ?

It’s one of the reasons they armed them selves

I'm aware. However, the law is the law.

The detainees did not follow the law, and a person lost their life as a result. I don't think they are going to fair well in court.

 

[ChezJfrey]

They had reasonable suspicion. And thats the argument. Personally I feel their suspicion was justified.

You are aware they had firearms stolen from the property right. Like a week or two prior ?

It’s one of the reasons they armed them selves

No, they didn't have reasonable suspicion, per the state law, and per the judge that ruled based on both that law and a prior precedent ruling. You may disagree, but it doesn't matter what you, or even I think, but rather, how the law and court views it in this particular state.

So, they didn't know the law, and did something stupid, executing a citizen arrest that did not meet the legal contemporaneous requirement for them to rightfully perform. Then, the accosted did something pretty stupid too, and he is dead, and these other guys are near certain to do prison time as their unlawful arrest attempt, negates their self-defense.

Know your state/local laws, before pulling guns out, else it gets dicey...hell, even within the law, it gets dicey, as we were well reminded this week.

 

[jakelly]

What evidence pointed to felony burglary? As far as I’m aware, they saw a black dude walking off a neighbor’s property. Genuinely asking.

Firstly, this is the statute for burglary in GA.

Georgia Code Title 16. Crimes and Offenses § 16-7-1 | FindLaw

Georgia Title 16. Crimes and Offenses Section 16-7-1. Read the code on FindLaw

codes.findlaw.com

Secondly, there doesn’t need to be evidence proving burglary. There needs to be evidence to support reasonable suspicion. I think they had video of him from across the street, not the owner’s video from inside the new construction, but their own, knew he had been in there for some time (18 min IIRC), and he didn’t have permission from the owner. That coupled with the many burglaries in the neighborhood committed by someone matching Arbery’s description, would likely meet the criteria for reasonable suspicion.

 

[seanh]

They had reasonable suspicion. And thats the argument. Personally I feel their suspicion was justified.

You are aware they had firearms stolen from the property right. Like a week or two prior ?

It’s one of the reasons they armed them selves

No, they didn't have reasonable suspicion. What they had was suspicion, reasonable is argumentative.
Assuming the suspicion is reasonable, it's reasonable, then we look at actions.. This is where the failure starts.

Would a reasonable PRUDENT person, Grab a gun and go give Chase to somebody for stuff and that they reasonably believe has a weapon? The answer is no.

Could have easily taken pictures, video and not necessarily given Chase but followed till the police showed up... This is more along the lines of what a reasonable prudent person would do.

As to the argument that people are making thing about the so called victim grabbing the shotgun… I support him 100%. Guilty or innocent, if you're pointing a gun at me and I think at any moment I can take it and shove it up your ass, I'm going to.

 

[ChezJfrey]

Firstly, this is the statute for burglary in GA.

Georgia Code Title 16. Crimes and Offenses § 16-7-1 | FindLaw

Georgia Title 16. Crimes and Offenses Section 16-7-1. Read the code on FindLaw

codes.findlaw.com

Secondly, there doesn’t need to be evidence proving burglary. There needs to be evidence to support reasonable suspicion. I think they had video of him from across the street, not the owner’s video from inside the new construction, but their own, knew he had been in there for some time (18 min IIRC), and he didn’t have permission from the owner. That coupled with the many burglaries in the neighborhood committed by someone matching Arbery’s description, would likely meet the criteria for reasonable suspicion.

And that method you just used, to "prove" they had reasonable suspicion, by looking at the statue, and concluding, "yes," is likely why these guys are screwed. The judge reviewed, and citing a legal precedent from another case, that outlines this "suspicion," states that it also has to be supported by contemporaneous knowledge or witnessing, which was not met in this case, negates their right to a citizen arrest, and because their actions are now unlawful, they don't have a right to self-defense for the events that unfolded. At least that was my understanding after watching the judge's ruling the other day.

 

[jakelly]

@ChezJfrey regarding my previous comment, I wasn’t aware of any ruling from any court. I haven’t kept up with this and don’t care to. If that’s the case, they’re likely to be stuck in the appellate process.

I will say this: I know Ahmaud Arbery was committing criminal trespass and I think he was committing felony burglary. I don’t think the defendants were or probably are smart.

 

[GreenGO Juan]

No, they didn't have reasonable suspicion. What they had was suspicion, reasonable is argumentative.
Assuming the suspicion is reasonable, it's reasonable, then we look at actions.. This is where the failure starts.

Would a reasonable PRUDENT person, Grab a gun and go give Chase to somebody for stuff and that they reasonably believe has a weapon? The answer is no.

Could have easily taken pictures, video and not necessarily given Chase but followed till the police showed up... This is more along the lines of what a reasonable prudent person would do.

As to the argument that people are making thing about the so called victim grabbing the shotgun… I support him 100%. Guilty or innocent, if you're pointing a gun at me and I think at any moment I can take it and shove it up your ass, I'm going to.

Did the McMichaels ever level the weapons at him??? I don’t believe they did until after he punched one of them in the face and tried to grab it.

Having a firearm is not necessarily illegal, it’s what you do with that fire arm.

And taking pictures and all that jazz that you talk about when the person runs away isn’t going to solve anything.

Also your chest thumping about what you would do in that situation, Instead of trying to escalate it, may be calming thing down would be the right decision. Like stopping and talking to the people who are trying to figure out what you’re doing in a house that’s been burglarized recently.

He didn’t walk out of the house he ran out of that house that shits on video.

You are aware Aubrey has multiple charges of doing criminal shit right, hundred percent that motherfucker was up to looking to steal and shit. If you don’t see that you don’t know a fucking thing about criminals and how they think

 

[ChezJfrey]

@ChezJfrey regarding my previous comment, I wasn’t aware of any ruling from any court. I haven’t kept up with this and don’t care to. If that’s the case, they’re likely to be stuck in the appellate process.

I will say this: I know Ahmaud Arbery was committing criminal trespass and I think he was committing felony burglary. I don’t think the defendants were or probably are smart.

Yeah, it just happened the other day, with the judge from this case meeting with the prosecution/defense. This illustrates something of a problem for us "regular folk" that even if we take the time to read laws, and we think something is within the law, we are not privy to any prior court rulings that are part of legal precedent, that also comprise the "full law." These guys may have read the law and concluded they were within it, but by the time they approached this other guy, technically they weren't, because this precedent the judge reviewed, further spelled out elements that they did not meet to execute this type of citizen arrest.

At least that's the gist I've gathered from this so far.

 

[GreenGO Juan]

Yeah, it just happened the other day, with the judge from this case meeting with the prosecution/defense. This illustrates something of a problem for us "regular folk" that even if we take the time to read laws, and we think something is within the law, we are not privy to any prior court rulings that are part of legal precedent, that also comprise the "full law." These guys may have read the law and concluded they were within it, but by the time they approached this other guy, technically they weren't, because this precedent the judge reviewed, further spelled out elements that they did not meet to execute this type of citizen arrest.

At least that's the gist I've gathered from this so far.

And this is why I don’t think it should be a murder charge their intention was not to kill him.

I could completely see them getting charged with something but putting all three of them away from murder it’s not right

 

[woogie_man]

1 - He didn't have anything and was caught doing nothing but jogging that day.
2 - The act of trying to detain him in this situation is completely illegal
3 - All 3 chased and kept cutting him off. Them starting to chase and corner him is why they are all 3 guilty. If Arbery was me I would have been Kyle defending my actions on shooting 3 retards who were trying to kill me.

Seems like you need to take a moment and take a read of Georgia law.

The only retard here is you. This thug had every chance to walk away but chose to fight. He was unarmed and knew the cops were coming. Instead of waiting and dealing with the cops. Who knew him for robberies in the same neighborhood. He chose to FIGHT AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A GUN. Race has zero to do with this, so get that out of your head. This individual wasn't from this neighborhood and it was known robberies and breakins had been an issue. You have someone who doesn't belong in your neighborhood, you will take notice and make your presence known.

Like I said before...this thug decided to play gangster and paid with his life.