[Puffer Fish]

The three men who chased Ahmaud Arbery have been sentenced to life in prison.
Arbery was killed after he ran at one of the men who had a gun and tried to take away the gun.

This is a very outrageous and unjust ruling, in my opinion and the opinions of many others.

Not only was the man who actually shot Arbery sentenced to life in prison, but the other two men who were with him were as well.
The man who is least guilty was "only" sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. He had filmed the incident, and later give the video and testimony of what happened to police. This was later used as evidence against them, and likely a guilty verdict would not have even been possible without it.

There is probably a huge amount of bias here against these men, due to the current push in society being created by the news media about outrage over racist killings of black men, in situations involving police or people who are carrying out the type of actions that police do. The bias is not only one of an outrage and trying to seek vengeance against racism, but also probably a bias against the use of physical force, and especially the use of guns, to deal with situations, when those people are trying to protect themselves and property, or stop crimes.

This is a very short summary of the story:
Gregory McMichael and his son Travis got into a pickup truck with guns to follow a young black man they saw running through their neighborhood whom they suspected may have burglarized houses and been responsible for break-ins in the neighborhood. Arbery was not willing to stop and talk to the men, so they continued to follow him in their truck, and Arbery ran at a faster pace to try to get away from them. The chase went past another neighbor's house, William Bryan, who saw the MicMichael's truck chasing the young black man. William Bryan then quickly went into his pickup truck to chase the suspect. At some point into the chase, the McMichael's truck stopped on the road, as Arbery was running towards it, away from the other truck that was chasing him. Gregory McMichael was at that point in the back bed of the pickup truck holding a gun. Arbery was running towards the direction of Travis McMichael, who had just stepped out of the front left driver's side door and was holding a shotgun, but Arbery changed direction and ran along the right side of the truck towards the front of the truck, at the same time Travis McMichael turned and moved towards the front left corner of the truck, facing towards the direction of Arbery. The camera does not get a good view at this point, but it appears Arbery ran at Travis McMichael. A shot can be heard (which hit Arbery), and then Travis can be seen stepping backwards while struggling with Arbery who has his hands on the shotgun, and then Arbery punches Travis.

A personal commentary and assessment of the situation: Due to the situation and the position of the truck in the street, it is understandable why the McMichaels and Arbery did what they did in this situation.

An exact timeline:
A neighbor had called police after they saw Arbery entering a home that was under construction. Police records show the first call came in at 1:08 pm. Around 1:10, video shows the McMichael's truck following Arbery. Around 1:15 pm, a call was made to police from Travis McMichael's cell phone. This call lasted only 21 seconds before shots could be heard.

Like most controversial cases and situations that involve injustice, the story involves many detailed complications. I do not wish to focus on this story to much because plenty of debate about that has already taken place in other threads in this forum, and it will distract from the focus of other parts of this subject, which I would like to focus on in this thread.

Some argue that this was entirely a case of self defense, that none of them did anything that should be illegal. Others argue that the three may have made some mistakes that deserve punishment but that they should not be held responsible for the death. Others argue that they may be partially responsible for the death, but due to the circumstances of the situation the punishment should be far less than in the case of normal murder. Others argue that they are entirely responsible for the death, and that it was a murder.

My view is that Gregory McMichael had reason to be suspicious of Arbery, but it was only adequate enough suspicion to try to follow him until police could arrive. Arbery probably did not want to wait around for police to arrive and that is why he was running trying to get away. Travis McMichael only took part in the chase because of Gregory McMichael. There was not really adequate time in that situation to communicate why Gregory McMichael was chasing the suspect. Neither was there adequate time to immediately call police. Travis and Bryan both did not know if police had already been called, and they were both focusing on driving the trucks, trying to pursue the suspect. Gregory McMichael was a retired former police officer.

The fact that the three were not arrested by authorities until over 2 months after the incident indicates that this was not initially seen by police as an obvious murder.

[Fasces]

Once upon a time, a nice white Mr. Puffer Fish took a walk through an urban neighbourhood. He was followed by three urban thugs in a vehicle, adorned with gang flags. They followed Mr. Puffer Fish for several blocks, and Mr. Puffer Fish decided to duck through an alley way to avoid these dangerous hoodlums. At the next intersection, these urban thugs got out of the vehicle.

"Hey, cracker, there's been a lot of robberies in this urban neighborhood," they said at gunpoint. One urban youth held an Uzi submachine gun to Mr. Puffer Fish face. "What's your name?"

Now, does Mr. Puffer Fish have a reasonable right to self-defense in this context? Or should Mr. Puffer Fish allow himself to be held at gunpoint by these urban gang members?

[Rugoz]

They were lucky Arbery didn't control a Reaper drone with hellfire missiles.

[Drlee]

Excellent verdict and appropriate sentence. Sadly we will see more of this kind of thing in the near future conducted by people emboldened by the killer Rittenhouse's acquittal.

These three scumbags will never see the outside of a prison again. Rightly so.

[Puffer Fish]

Once upon a time, a nice white Mr. Puffer Fish took a walk through an urban neighbourhood. He was followed by three urban thugs in a vehicle, adorned with gang flags. They followed Mr. Puffer Fish for several blocks, and Mr. Puffer Fish decided to duck through an alley way to avoid these dangerous hoodlums. At the next intersection, these urban thugs got out of the vehicle.

"Hey, cracker, there's been a lot of robberies in this urban neighborhood," they said at gunpoint. One urban youth held an Uzi submachine gun to Mr. Puffer Fish face. "What's your name?"

Now, does Mr. Puffer Fish have a reasonable right to self-defense in this context? Or should Mr. Puffer Fish allow himself to be held at gunpoint by these urban gang members?

Remember, Travis didn't actually come up right next to Arbery. Arbery ran towards Travis, presumably trying to grab and take away his gun.

Even if you think Travis should be punished for the killing or view it as a murder, this does not seem like a normal murder to me.


Forensic analysis indicated that the shotgun had either been fired in direct contact with the suspect, or at extremely close range.
Arbery had a large body build comparable to a football player, probably stronger than Travis.

I know you will argue Travis never should have put himself into that situation to begin with. But once he was already in that situation, what was he supposed to do at that point?

Had Arbery been able to succeed in pulling the gun away from Travis, he likely would have immediately shot Gregory, who was standing in the back of the pickup truck bed and also had a gun.
(And if that's not what Arbery was going to do, then it's hard to argue Arbery's actions constituted "self defense")

[Fasces]

I know you will argue Travis never should have put himself into that situation to begin with. But once he was already in that situation, what was he supposed to do at that point?

I know the robber shouldn't have held that gas station clerk at gunpoint and demanded the cash in the register - that was wrong. But once the gas station clerk held up a shotgun, what was the robber supposed to do? Say what you will, the killing was self-defense, your honor! The robber had a genuine fear for his life!

[Puffer Fish]

I know the robber shouldn't have held that gas station clerk at gunpoint and demanded the cash in the register - that was wrong. But once the gas station clerk held up a shotgun, what was the robber supposed to do? Say what you will, the killing was self-defense, your honor! The robber had a genuine fear for his life!

I totally understand the analogy you are trying to make, and understand, but what those three men did here was very different from a robbery.

Will you agree they had the right to follow until police arrived, and that they grabbed guns because they did not know if the suspect might be armed, even if they didn't have the right to try to stop the suspect?

Will you also agree that Arbery didn't really have a good reason to try doing what he did?

[Unthinking Majority]

I don't understand how the guy filming got life in prison for murder. I get the other 2, they had guns pointed and chased Arbery down.

[Fasces]

Will you agree they had the right to follow until police arrived, and that they grabbed guns because they did not know if the suspect might be armed, even if they didn't have the right to try to stop the suspect?

You're asking me if I think people have a right to stalk and harass other people in public while carrying a deadly weapon?

No, they don't.

[Puffer Fish]

You're asking me if I think people have a right to stalk and harass other people in public while carrying a deadly weapon?

No, they don't.

Let's not use loaded words or get into a semantics argument.

Is "stalk and harass" pretty much equivalent for you to "follow and pursue", yes or no?


Did these men have a legal right to be able to follow and try to keep an eye on a suspect's location until police could arrive, if there would have been a justifiable reason for police to stop the suspect?


Here's something else to consider: Travis claims to have seen someone who matched the profile of Arbery before in the construction site, but Travis did not approach because Travis was unarmed at the time and he says the suspect reached for their waist as if the suspect might have a gun. Travis called this incident in to the police, 11 days before the chase and shooting incident.

[Fasces]

Did these men have a legal right to be able to follow and try to keep an eye on a suspect's location until police could arrive, if there would have been a justifiable reason for police to stop the suspect?

No. They had zero probable cause. They hadn't witnessed him committing a crime. There was no legal reason to follow Arbery. Even the police would not have been justified in stopping Arbery.

stalk

/stôk/

verb

gerund or present participle: stalking

Stalking is unwanted and/or repeated surveillance by an individual or group toward another person. Stalking behaviors are interrelated to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person or monitoring them.

Travis claims to have seen someone who looked like Arbery before in the construction site, but Travis did not approach because he was unarmed and he says the suspect reached for their waist as if they might have a gun. Gregory called this incident in to the police, 11 days before the chase and shooting incident.

And that is all they were legally entitled to do in the second case, as well.

They committed a crime. The crime ended with a murder. Those are the facts.

[Puffer Fish]

No. They had zero probable cause.

That is not entirely true. They had some cause. Yes, I will agree with you it was not adequate cause to stop Arbery.
There had been break-ins and burglaries in the neighborhood. The men were frustrated and wanted to find the culprit.
A person matching Arbery's description had been seen (and been caught on security video) trespassing into a construction site in the neighborhood. This made Gregory McMichael suspicious.

Also another little interesting fact of possible relevance, in 2018, Gregory McMichael had helped an investigation in the DA's office about Arbery's shoplifting charge, which led to a subsequent revocation and extension of Arbery's probation. It is unclear whether McMichael recognized him when he encountered Arbery on the day of the shooting. (The prosecutor told the court that those prior charges had nothing to do with the chase)

Oh, on top of that, you can see Arbery appearing to drop what appears to be a hammer in one of the videos.
If he was "just jogging", why was he carrying that? Either possibly a tool to break windows to enter into houses, or possibly taken from the construction site.

(It's true no tools were observed missing at the construction site, but they would not necessarily know since they probably did not keep track of all of their tools left around)

Now I'm definitely not saying jogging with a hammer is proof of a crime, but it is very suspicious.

They hadn't witnessed him committing a crime. There was no legal reason to follow Arbery.

Keep in mind they could have just as easily lied about having a fully valid legal reason to have chased and stopped Arbery, and then they could not have been found guilty. But they didn't lie.

Even the police would not have been justified in stopping Arbery.

Now that's likely not true.
This is debatable, but many police officers likely would have tried to at least stop to talk to him, possibly ask for identification, and if he had run away they would have tackled him and put him in handcuffs.

I speak from personal experience.

When it comes to police, "justified" can be kind of a fuzzy word.

(I'm not arguing here that's how it should be, but that is how it is, it is the reality)

There was no legal reason to follow Arbery.

If police could have stopped the suspect, then one could argue that they had the right to keep an eye on the location of that suspect until police could arrive.

[Fasces]

They had some cause.

They had zero probable cause that Arbery was guilty of any crime. He had not been witnessed committing a crime.

The men were frustrated and wanted to find the culprit.

Boo hoo. Vigilantism is a crime, just like armed robbery.

Oh, on top of that, you can see Arbery appearing to drop what appears to be a hammer in one of the videos.
If he was "just jogging", why was he carrying that? Either possibly a tool to break windows to enter into houses, or possibly taken from the construction site.

Jesus... he appeared to drop what appeared to maybe perhaps possible be a hammer, maybe.



Airtight case, that one.

This is debatable, but many police officers likely would have tried to at least stop to talk to him, possibly ask for identification, and if he had run away they would have tackled him and put him in handcuffs.

I speak from personal experience.

No one is claiming police brutality and abuse does not exist and is not routinely perpatrated against the poor and black.

Keep in mind they could have just as easily lied about having a fully valid legal reason to have chased and stopped Arbery, and then they could not have been found guilty. But they didn't lie.

Cool. They still murdered that man.

[Puffer Fish]

Boo hoo. Vigilantism is a crime, just like armed robbery.

You are making another overgeneralization here.

Of course we recognise there are things police can do, that other people can't (even including a retired police officer like Gregory).
But in other ways, what they should be allowed to do is not different.

If police can legally do something, you really have to ask yourself does it fall into the same type of crime "just like armed robbery" if someone else does it.

[Puffer Fish]

Keep in mind they could have just as easily lied about having a fully valid legal reason to have chased and stopped Arbery, and then they could not have been found guilty. But they didn't lie.

Cool. They still murdered that man.

Don't you think that should factor into the punishment, and they should be shown some leniency or mercy?

Especially since this wasn't just an "ordinary murder" (premeditated intent to kill was not there) and two of the men were not the ones who shot the gun.

Arbery RAN at Travis and tried to use his strength to take away his gun. At that point, what else was Travis supposed to do?

I know you will argue Travis never should have put himself into that situation to begin with. But once he was already in that situation, what was he supposed to do at that point?

[Puffer Fish]

Should what Arbery did actually be seen as constituting self defense?

Self defense usually implies you do something to protect your life or others. Did Arbery's action have any chance whatsoever of putting him in a better position or reducing the risk to himself? Considering there were two other men with guns present, I would say the answer is no.
On the contrary, any rational logical person would have known that those actions would have resulted in a high chance of being shot and likely death.

Arbery also had to have known the other men weren't just going to shoot him as he was running away down the street, because if they had wanted to do that they would have certainly already have done so.

Arbery's actions were probably because he did not want to be there when the police arrived. Right before Arbery ran at Travis, Travis told Arbery he was on the phone with police and police would be there soon. (The timeframe for this is confirmed by the 911 call recording)

[Fasces]

if police do something is it really that bad if others do it to?

Yes. If police pull over a drunk girl on a highway and at gunpoint arrest her and place her into their vehicle and then in a small concrete hole, it's an arrest.

When you do it, its an armed kidnapping.

Don't you think that should factor into the punishment, and they should be shown some leniency or mercy?

It was. They avoided the death penalty for their lynching.

Should what Arbery did actually be seen as constituting self defense?

Self defense usually implies you do something to protect your life or others. Did Arbery's action have any chance whatsoever of putting him in a better position or reducing the risk to himself?

Is your opinion really that Arbery should have stood there and let himself be murdered? What a joke.

[XogGyux]

This is a very outrageous and unjust ruling, in my opinion and the opinions of many others.

It seems you wouldn't know unjust if it was standing in front wearing a high visibility vest and slapping you on the face screaming at you.
The idea that you can have a party of people, chase down an innocent person exercising, attack him, murder him, film it, and not go immediately to jail should be frightening.
I wonder if you would be so understanding if the victim was your father? or your brother? or your son?
Fok off.

[XogGyux]

Self defense usually implies you do something to protect your life or others. Did Arbery's action have any chance whatsoever of putting him in a better position or reducing the risk to himself? Considering there were two other men with guns present, I would say the answer is no.
On the contrary, any rational logical person would have known that those actions would have resulted in a high chance of being shot and likely death.

That is simply moronic.
The guy is being chased down by people with guns. He did what he could. For all he had known, they were going to lynch him anyways, and he took his chances of going out fighting. Remember, this is the guy that was running AWAY. And these idiots lynching Arbery was not really outside of the realm of posibility. Remember, they didn't even get arrested at the beginning, if they had not been stupid enough to film everything and keep it in video they would have gotten away with it.
That is the only good thing about all of these issues... All of these racist scums are dimwits and they end up incriminating themselves 9/10 of the times.

Is your opinion really that Arbery should have stood there and let himself be murdered? What a joke.

Apparently so. This guy is bananas crazy.

To me, it is quite obvious that these morons were looking for an excuse to harm Arbery. I am not sure if they wanted to kill him, but I am confident they wanted to harm him badly, perhaps humiliate him. But the idiots took it too far. So even if you give them the benefit of the doubt... it turns out these morons are olympic-level stupid. And we cannot have these stupid armed morons free in this world. Ergo, they need to be in prison until they rot and die.
And you know what prisons are full of? Black people. It is an unjust system but it is true. These assholes are not going to have a nice time in prison I am sure of it

[pugsville]

The three men who chased Ahmaud Arbery have been sentenced to life in prison.
Arbery was killed after he ran at one of the men who had a gun and tried to take away the gun.

This is a very outrageous and unjust ruling, in my opinion and the opinions of many others.

Not only was the man who actually shot Arbery sentenced to life in prison, but the other two men who were with him were as well.
The man who is least guilty was "only" sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. He had filmed the incident, and later give the video and testimony of what happened to police. This was later used as evidence against them, and likely a guilty verdict would not have even been possible without it.

There is probably a huge amount of bias here against these men, due to the current push in society being created by the news media about outrage over racist killings of black men, in situations involving police or people who are carrying out the type of actions that police do. The bias is not only one of an outrage and trying to seek vengeance against racism, but also probably a bias against the use of physical force, and especially the use of guns, to deal with situations, when those people are trying to protect themselves and property, or stop crimes.

This is a very short summary of the story:
Gregory McMichael and his son Travis got into a pickup truck with guns to follow a young black man they saw running through their neighborhood whom they suspected may have burglarized houses and been responsible for break-ins in the neighborhood. Arbery was not willing to stop and talk to the men, so they continued to follow him in their truck, and Arbery ran at a faster pace to try to get away from them. The chase went past another neighbor's house, William Bryan, who saw the MicMichael's truck chasing the young black man. William Bryan then quickly went into his pickup truck to chase the suspect. At some point into the chase, the McMichael's truck stopped on the road, as Arbery was running towards it, away from the other truck that was chasing him. Gregory McMichael was at that point in the back bed of the pickup truck holding a gun. Arbery was running towards the direction of Travis McMichael, who had just stepped out of the front left driver's side door and was holding a shotgun, but Arbery changed direction and ran along the right side of the truck towards the front of the truck, at the same time Travis McMichael turned and moved towards the front left corner of the truck, facing towards the direction of Arbery. The camera does not get a good view at this point, but it appears Arbery ran at Travis McMichael. A shot can be heard (which hit Arbery), and then Travis can be seen stepping backwards while struggling with Arbery who has his hands on the shotgun, and then Arbery punches Travis.

A personal commentary and assessment of the situation: Due to the situation and the position of the truck in the street, it is understandable why the McMichaels and Arbery did what they did in this situation.

An exact timeline:
A neighbor had called police after they saw Arbery entering a home that was under construction. Police records show the first call came in at 1:08 pm. Around 1:10, video shows the McMichael's truck following Arbery. Around 1:15 pm, a call was made to police from Travis McMichael's cell phone. This call lasted only 21 seconds before shots could be heard.

Like most controversial cases and situations that involve injustice, the story involves many detailed complications. I do not wish to focus on this story to much because plenty of debate about that has already taken place in other threads in this forum, and it will distract from the focus of other parts of this subject, which I would like to focus on in this thread.

Some argue that this was entirely a case of self defense, that none of them did anything that should be illegal. Others argue that the three may have made some mistakes that deserve punishment but that they should not be held responsible for the death. Others argue that they may be partially responsible for the death, but due to the circumstances of the situation the punishment should be far less than in the case of normal murder. Others argue that they are entirely responsible for the death, and that it was a murder.

My view is that Gregory McMichael had reason to be suspicious of Arbery, but it was only adequate enough suspicion to try to follow him until police could arrive. Arbery probably did not want to wait around for police to arrive and that is why he was running trying to get away. Travis McMichael only took part in the chase because of Gregory McMichael. There was not really adequate time in that situation to communicate why Gregory McMichael was chasing the suspect. Neither was there adequate time to immediately call police. Travis and Bryan both did not know if police had already been called, and they were both focusing on driving the trucks, trying to pursue the suspect. Gregory McMichael was a retired former police officer.

The fact that the three were not arrested by authorities until over 2 months after the incident indicates that this was not initially seen by police as an obvious murder.

Teh failure to act ealier sghows teh racism in society. This was brutal lynching. A racist murder.