New leaked video of black jogger gunned down by a white father and son duo

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Citizens have no right to detain anyone for walking or running in the street. In the preliminary trial it was stated the McMichaels had no knowledge of any crime being committed.

So you are saying when you leave your house and are walking to your car. Some random men may see you, load up the shotguns and chase and block you in to detain you on suspicion?

Well I'm certainly not going to try and fight with someone pointing a shotgun at me or grab it out of their hands. I would probably stop, show the person that I'm not a threat and say WTF are you doing pointing a shotgun at me for?

What if you are a black man being chased by a couple known armed racists and have already been hit by one of them? Would that change your mind at all? Could you be absolutely sure detainment was all they had in mind? Or would you think you were in a fight for your life one way or another? I can see where you might think fighting was your only chance. especially when one had attempted to run you over.

originally posted by: FellowHuman
But here we go, you are correct, but only to a degree.

No, I'm 100% correct which is why you are told, 'anything you can and say will be used against you'. Retards gonna retard.

Point is i was referring to him just giving his rundown of the videos, when i think it would be best if people saw it themselves. Likewise I would want to see the transcript of the whole interview, not just being given snippets. So i can confirm whether anything else was being said, and in what context the answer was being given. What the exact question that was asked and so on.

Point is unless you're his defense attorney you get nothing so suck it up.

These guys are going to prison despite your burning desire that they don't.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

What are you talking about? The McMichaels told a cop friend months prior that if English wanted their help to contact them. The cop texted Mr. English. Mr. English stated he NEVER contacted the McMichaels. The McMichaels do not state they ever spoke to Mr. English besides Travis introducing himself one day. There is no legit order from anyone.

The McMichaels did not call 911 until they were already pursuing. So. They saw a man in the street and armed themselves and pursued. That is what you call a fact.

The sources are cited all through this thread. This particular point was brought up in the preliminary trial the other day as well.

a reply to: panoz77

Ok again. You are chased, possibly hit by the pursuers, they corralled your escape out of the neighborhood forcing you back in the the neighborhood, you don't have a phone to call 911, you even try running in a ditch to get away. You cannot. You can turn your back to be shot in it or finally face them. You are shot before you have contact with them per Travis's statement to the police. After you are shot once you try to get the gun away.

These are facts that have come out. So after being shot once. He should have stood there and accepted the remaining bullets like a good boy?

The justifications around here ignoring the facts should be astonishing, but actually it's very telling.

a reply to: frogs453

Agreed, 100%

I don't go around committing crimes, so if somebody without a badge pointed a gun at me it'd immediately be a gun fight

And since you can't outrun bullets and Ahmed wasn't armed, fighting for the gun was his best shot other than compliance and *praying* the person doesn't decide to shoot you anyhow. No thanks, if there's a gun aimed at me the fight is on and one of us are taking the room temp. challenge

In the case of a long gun especially, depending on the positioning of the parties involved, you could have a real chance at taking their weapon. Even if you can't outright take it from the attacker, (in the case of a pump shotgun) you only have to knock the gun ever so slightly out of battery to prevent it from firing. There are safety switches on many of them. You can jam up the trigger with your finger (painful but doable). Its not over until its over, and I applaud him for trying to wrestle the weapon away from the attacker. Its a shame there was multiple assailants, otherwise it seems he would've likely gotten the better of the assailant and would have been totally justified in discharging that long gun after gaining control of it

a reply to: panoz77

Really? You truly wouldn't fight like hell against an attacker armed with a gun?

I remind you absolutely no evidence indicating the decedent was engaged in any sort of criminal activity has come to light. At this point, they may as well have rode up on and pulled weapons on any random person engaged in any random but lawful activity

He had no burglary tools. No conveyance for those tools. No weapon. Nothing even close to evidence he was engaged in the commission of a felony or indeed any crime whatsoever. Even *if* there had been burglaries in the area and even *if* this man somewhat matched the description of the burglar only a complete idiot would try to make an arrest under those circumstances. Where's the proof? A magistrate would laugh them out of his courtroom.

Burglary is a notoriously difficult crime to prosecute, and in fact that's why so many go unsolved. Unless they're caught in the act (or in a constructive act like possessing burglary tools while trespassing), captured on CCTV, license plate, etc. it will probably go unsolved. Sometimes you get lucky and catch them trying to sell the stolen goods at a white/gray market (pawn shop). Most of the time not.

At most these guys should have simply followed him from a distance to either 1) get more information for detectives to follow up or 2) possibly get lucky and catch the person of interest in the act. But no one in their right mind would try to make an arrest on the known grounds alone. It is beyond stupidity but still wouldn't be a huge deal save for the fact someone died as a result of it! The third way here would've been my favorite choice: "live to fight another day" or in this case, rest easy knowing that although something like 15% of burglaries are solved, most burglars are repeat offenders who burglarize many dwellings/businesses, and their odds of getting caught go up significantly over time. Its usually why many burglars end up with multiple charges sometimes spanning more than one county. In some cases it even crosses state lines, which usually means FBI will get involved and that opens up a whole new book of charges and importantly penalties. This is why its so important to remember you can't make a person fit a crime. The evidence has to do all the talking. Don't rush to judgement because even though their chances are high of getting away with this one, statistics say they won't be so lucky in the long term and once they're caught they are going to have to answer for what they wrongly thought they had gotten away with. Especially if you are a private citizen or acting in that capacity, take your time .. know the law, and most importantly FACTUALLY BE RIGHT when you formally accuse another individual of a crime. Don't feel the need to apprehend them on the spot, either call law enforcement or go swear out a warrant. This will have the same effect. The person will still be arrested and charged with whatever crime you swore to on the probable cause affadavit

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Explain what you are correct about? And how I am wrong? Do you even listen to what i write? I get the impression that you don't. I said facts can be deceptive (more accurately, that one can present facts in a biased way that then leads people to a false conclusion/perception/narrative), is that correct or no? Likewise this can be intentional or unintentional/accidental.

If that isnt correct then you are 100% correct. If facts can deceive, then you arent. And I am curious what your answer is, because the answer is obvious, so i dont know why you said what you did.

Showing a clip of a video, is a fact. It shows a part of what happened, but that doesnt tell the whole story. So if we are looking for the whole story, we need all the facts (which is impossible because we arent all knowing), and then we need to analyze them properly.

Likewise you can think of all those objects that get built where when you look at them from a certain angle you might see it as a bird, but then from a different angle it looks like a plane. So when you present something in a certain way people see different things.

And i didnt say i was going to get anything, i was just curious why the public who isnt privy to all the facts, act so prideful and arrogant in their opinions and judgments. Specifically why they are so enthusiastic to condemn someone they dont even know, all I'm saying is that might not be the karma someone wants.

originally posted by: FellowHuman
Explain what you are correct about? And how I am wrong?

The GBI Agent's testimony. It isn't bias, it was the statement given to the GBI by Retard Number Three. Therefore it's a fact.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


It’s certainly looking more and more likely they will be found guilty.

Still I stand by my statement: do not charge at loaded shotguns from 50m when you can run away into woodland. If a man chases you down the street with a shotgun the chances are he has a screw loose and will use it.

a reply to: JBurns

He was an ex cop so should have known the law really. Maybe it was force of habit to chase down black people with the intent to kill, after all isn’t that what all cops over there do?

originally posted by: Grenade
Still I stand by my statement: do not charge at loaded shotguns from 50m when you can run away into woodland. If a man chases you down the street with a shotgun the chances are he has a screw loose and will use it.

Have you been updating yourself with the latest testimony from the preliminary hearing? The Retards stated they hit him with their truck, boxed him in, chased him into a ditch and shot him before he tried to get the shotgun.

They're going to prison.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yeah I read it.

They’re going down for murder, still personally I’d have ran for the trees and not stopped.

For a start a couple of fat slobs would never have caught him off road.

Too brave or proud for his own good.

a reply to: Grenade

They blocked his exit from the neighborhood. They corralled him back INTO the neighborhood. If he tried to run through the backyards of the neighborhood you would be yelling that any neighbor had the right to shoot him because he was on their property.

a reply to: frogs453

I’m not defending their actions I’m telling you what i would do!

Don’t tell me what I think or would say please and I’ll give you the same respect.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
They're going to prison.

Bet'cha they won't. There's gonna be a good percentage of their jury that will side with the way Georgia Statute is written. Too easy.

All the bullcrap hearsay about what somebody said they did will be set aside ... until the day their financial reward is being decided. Then they'll never have to worry about $$$ for anything. I imagine they'll each come off with a minimum of $5mil. Might take a while, but they'll be set for life the day they're acquitted, and everybody knows. LOL

a reply to: Grenade

Agreed. You are right. My apology. That is what you would do. Although it's easy to say what anyone would do if you are not in that situation. If you tried for what 5 minutes or so to get away and now they have taken to hitting you with the truck which may have occurred it seems likely that most people would not just stand there to be shot. As Travis stated he didn't think there was even any contact and he shot Arbery the first time, they were going to find any excuse to shoot that man.

originally posted by: Snarl
All the bullcrap hearsay about what somebody said they did will be set aside ...

Hearsay?

Dial said eyewitness and co-defendant William Bryan Jr., who has also been charged with murder, reported hearing the slur. It was also captured on video.

You should really catch up on the latest information prior to making your apologist remarks. It can make you look slightly less foolish than you have looked all thread.

How much we betting moneybags?

originally posted by: Grenade
They’re going down for murder, still personally I’d have ran for the trees and not stopped.

He tried that.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
How much we betting moneybags?

I'm on a fixed income. What odds are you giving? LOL

originally posted by: Snarl
I'm on a fixed income. What odds are you giving? LOL

You should be giving me odds since you're the one who thinks a racist retard who called someone he just shot to death a 'f****** n*****' is a shoo-in for not going to prison