New development in the shooting case of the black georgia jogger

[jc456]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Many posts ago I explained about Trespassing under Georgia law. I have never denied it. Now you think you have me. So give me a little more rope please.

Were the McMichaels going to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest according to the laws of Georgia?

well first, that means the man wasn't out for jog, so that's blown up. second you all said there wasn't a crime, well now we know their was. Third, they called the police , fourth, they were attempting to hold him until the cops got there. the blackman spoiled that intended action by struggling for the gun which ended up killing him Again, there is no need to contact police if the intent was to shoot the man.

Stop lying. You have no proof he wasn't out for a jog.

theres no proof he was,,,

The last I heard was that the msm is still running with their story the two white guys drove up on the black guy jumped out and assaulted him.....telling such lies should make them liable for some lawsuits..........well we got a lot of internet lawyers on here maybe one of them will enlighten on this matter.

Actually. That is exactly what happened. I know the MSM getting the story right is hard to believe. Perhaps you should view it like the broken clock. It is right twice a day.

not according to the video,,,in it he ran up to the guys and assaulted the son,,,

that's exactly what he did. funny, they see nothing with him trespassing and perhaps robbing that house, but they see everything wrong with a guy in the middle of the street doing absolutely nothing until the blackman runs into him. Again, the black man ran into him intentionally. the Video doesn't lie.

You need to know what Georgia Law says. The guy in the middle of the street was committing a felony. It is called Aggravated Assault. It is defined as possessing a weapon and using it in a manner which can or may cause death or injury. It is why the charge was filed against them both. They were not innocent bystanders before the scary black guy attacked. They were criminals. They were committing Felonies to try and catch a guy suspected of a misdemeanor.

why? explain it to me. he was by himself. you saw the video right?

This has been posted by Faun. So here you go again. Try reading it instead of ignoring it.

Dana Loesch#1 Female Radio Host in AmericaThe Killing of Ahmaud Arbery

Consistency is important, particularly when it comes to due process. So, too, is discussion of self defense rights. I’ve seen the video of Ahmaud Arbery’s killing (a link to this video …

danaloesch.com

I ignore that jack hat.

 

[MacTheKnife]

someone should shoot those 2 fat mf,ing redneck racists Otherwise known as republicans

hehheh You are inciting racial violence....I think Jawja has a law gin dat boyo

 

[SavannahMann]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Many posts ago I explained about Trespassing under Georgia law. I have never denied it. Now you think you have me. So give me a little more rope please.

Were the McMichaels going to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest according to the laws of Georgia?

well first, that means the man wasn't out for jog, so that's blown up. second you all said there wasn't a crime, well now we know their was. Third, they called the police , fourth, they were attempting to hold him until the cops got there. the blackman spoiled that intended action by struggling for the gun which ended up killing him Again, there is no need to contact police if the intent was to shoot the man.

Stop lying. You have no proof he wasn't out for a jog.

theres no proof he was,,,

The last I heard was that the msm is still running with their story the two white guys drove up on the black guy jumped out and assaulted him.....telling such lies should make them liable for some lawsuits..........well we got a lot of internet lawyers on here maybe one of them will enlighten on this matter.

Actually. That is exactly what happened. I know the MSM getting the story right is hard to believe. Perhaps you should view it like the broken clock. It is right twice a day.

not according to the video,,,in it he ran up to the guys and assaulted the son,,,

that's exactly what he did. funny, they see nothing with him trespassing and perhaps robbing that house, but they see everything wrong with a guy in the middle of the street doing absolutely nothing until the blackman runs into him. Again, the black man ran into him intentionally. the Video doesn't lie.

You need to know what Georgia Law says. The guy in the middle of the street was committing a felony. It is called Aggravated Assault. It is defined as possessing a weapon and using it in a manner which can or may cause death or injury. It is why the charge was filed against them both. They were not innocent bystanders before the scary black guy attacked. They were criminals. They were committing Felonies to try and catch a guy suspected of a misdemeanor.

why? explain it to me. he was by himself. you saw the video right?

This has been posted by Faun. So here you go again. Try reading it instead of ignoring it.

Dana Loesch#1 Female Radio Host in AmericaThe Killing of Ahmaud Arbery

Consistency is important, particularly when it comes to due process. So, too, is discussion of self defense rights. I’ve seen the video of Ahmaud Arbery’s killing (a link to this video …

danaloesch.com

I ignore that jack hat.

So you ignore the Conservative Legal Analysis. You don’t like the link because it does not back up what you say and points out the law does not support your position. Now what system decides the law does not apply when it is inconvenient?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, reacts to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path circles to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance.

I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, reacts to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path circles to the front of the truck:

Last view of jogger passing the front of the truck.

About half a second after Arbery disappears from view the FIRST shot is heard but not seen. It happens in this view:

So I see a jogger hoping to run past two crazy gunmen yelling STOP STOP STOP as he runs by the truck and a split second past the truck a shot is fired from a man circling in front of him trying to block his way.

Coming back into view I see:

The two men struggle for a weapon that has already been fired. The rest of what happens is not in dispute except what you think you see.

You say Arbery, “Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires,”

Nowhere in any view when Arberry puts his hands on the weapon is the first shot fired.

.... it was fired in front of the truck.

Arberry had hands on the weapon in between the first shot and the second.

The facts mean Arbery heard the first shot as he ran past the truck with about 1/2 a second to react.

His instant reaction to the first shot (its safe to speculate) was to get the weapon to survive the ambush. He did have a chance and got a few good punches on his assailant before he was unfortunately shot and killed.

Thats what I see backed up by the video as it really happened.

MacTheKnife what do you see?

 

[progressive hunter]

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, reacts to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path circles to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance.

I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, reacts to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path circles to the front of the truck:

View attachment 335232
Last view of jogger passing the front of the truck.

About half a second after Arbery disappears from view the FIRST shot is heard but not seen. It happens in this view:

View attachment 335248
So I see a jogger hoping to run past two crazy gunmen yelling STOP STOP STOP as he runs by the truck and a split second past the truck a shot is fired from a man circling in front of him trying to block his way.

Coming back into view I see:

View attachment 335253
The two men struggle for a weapon that has already been fired. The rest of what happens is not in dispute except what you think you see.

You say Arbery, “Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires,”

Nowhere in any view when Arberry puts his hands on the weapon is the first shot fired.

.... it was fired in front of the truck.

Arberry had hands on the weapon in between the first shot and the second.

The facts mean Arbery heard the first shot as he ran past the truck with about 1/2 a second to react.

His intant reaction to the first shot (its safe to speculate) was to get the weapon to survive the ambush. He did have a chance and got a few good punches on his assailant before he was unfortunately shot and killed.

That what I see backed up by the video as it really happened.

the fact that the RUNNER saw the guy with a gun from close to 100 feet away and decided to run at him instead of running away says he wanted to confront them not get away,,,

 

[SavannahMann]

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, reacts to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path circles to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance.

I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, reacts to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path circles to the front of the truck:

View attachment 335232
Last view of jogger passing the front of the truck.

About half a second after Arbery disappears from view the FIRST shot is heard but not seen. It happens in this view:

View attachment 335248
So I see a jogger hoping to run past two crazy gunmen yelling STOP STOP STOP as he runs by the truck and a split second past the truck a shot is fired from a man circling in front of him trying to block his way.

Coming back into view I see:

View attachment 335253
The two men struggle for a weapon that has already been fired. The rest of what happens is not in dispute except what you think you see.

You say Arbery, “Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires,”

Nowhere in any view when Arberry puts his hands on the weapon is the first shot fired.

.... it was fired in front of the truck.

Arberry had hands on the weapon in between the first shot and the second.

The facts mean Arbery heard the first shot as he ran past the truck with about 1/2 a second to react.

His intant reaction to the first shot (its safe to speculate) was to get the weapon to survive the ambush. He did have a chance and got a few good punches on his assailant before he was unfortunately shot and killed.

That what I see backed up by the video as it really happened.

the fact that the RUNNER saw the guy with a gun from close to 100 feet away and decided to run at him instead of running away says he wanted to confront them not get away,,,

The runner was also being pursued by a second vehicle. He was trapped between two forces.

 

[Jitss617]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Trespassing is a misdemeanor. That does not allow anyone in the state of Georgia to enforce a citizen's arrest. Even worse for the McMichaels, to perform a legally authorized citizen's arrest requires the arresting individual(s) to either have directly witnessed the crime or at least have direct knowledge of it. The McMichaels had neither.

I have told everyone that a dozen times. They are certain it is wrong. Moreover only the property owner or his representatives may press charges for Trespassing. Under the law in Georgia anyway.

Speaking of the property owner, here's what he had to say (through his attorney) on the matter...

"Mr. English wants to correct the mistaken impression that he had shared this video or any other information with the McMichaels prior to the McMichaels’ decision to chase Mr. Arbery. The homeowners had not even seen the February 23 video before Travis McMichael shot Mr. Arbery. When homeowner Larry English saw the photos of Mr. Arbery that were later broadcast, his first impression was that Mr. Arbery was not the man captured on video inside the house on February 23, and he said that to a neighbor. ​

​

​

By Wright Gazaway | May 11, 2020 at 5:32 PM EDT - Updated May 11 at 5:41 PM​

BRUNSWICK, Ga. (WTOC) - An attorney representing the homeowner of a construction site involved in the Ahmaud Arbery case issued a statement condemning the actions taken by Gregory and Travis McMichael.​

A brief surveillance clip appears to show a man that looks like Arbery inside the home minutes before he was killed on Feb. 23. A neighbor called 911 and reported someone in the home that afternoon; the home was under construction and not locked.​

Minutes later, responding officers found Arbery in the middle of the road, shot to death by Travis McMichael. Another video captured the shooting. The public release of that video last week sparked nationwide attention and calls for immediate arrests.​

The McMichaels told responding officers that they chased Arbery because they thought he was responsible for recent break-ins in the neighborhood. However, the only theft reported to police involved a gun stolen from Travis McMichael’s unlocked truck, according to reports provided to WTOC by the Glynn County Police Department.​

The revelation of this new video showing a man that looks like Arbery inside the home prompted the GBI to respond. The agency confirmed they had the video as evidence but pointed out they had it before arresting the McMichaels.​

Below is the entire statement from the homeowner’s attorney, J. Elizabeth Graddy:​

"Mr. English wants to correct the mistaken impression that he had shared this video or any other information with the McMichaels prior to the McMichaels’ decision to chase Mr. Arbery. The homeowners had not even seen the February 23 video before Travis McMichael shot Mr. Arbery. When homeowner Larry English saw the photos of Mr. Arbery that were later broadcast, his first impression was that Mr. Arbery was not the man captured on video inside the house on February 23, and he said that to a neighbor.​

​

In the months prior to February 23, a motion-activated camera had captured videos of someone inside the house (which was and remains a construction site) at night. Mr. English has never said that Mr. Arbery was the person or persons in those videos, and he does not see a resemblance now. After the first time that video captured someone in the house, Mr. English contacted local law enforcement on a non-emergency number and made them aware of the unauthorized entry onto his property. He never used the word "burglary." He never shared any of this information with the McMichaels, whom he did not even know. Nothing was ever stolen from the house -- which, again, was a construction site. Even if there had been a robbery, however, the English family would not have wanted a vigilante response. They would have entrusted the matter to law enforcement authorities. On February 23, the English family was two hours away from the Satilla Shores neighborhood andwas unaware of the tragedy that was unfolding. Mr. English was not the one who called 911 on February 23. The only crime that the homeowner has seen captured on video is the senseless killing of Mr. Arbery.​

​

As a native of South Georgia and an attorney, I personally was following this story in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution prior to the release of the video of the shooting. Based solely on Gregory McMichael's reported statement, my professional opinion was that this was a murder, possibly a capital murder. After seeing the video of the shooting, I wrote to Tom Durdin, the prosecutor to whom the case had been assigned, and expressed that opinion and asked why the McMichaels had not been arrested. I reviewed the published letters written by the two prosecutors who previously handled the case, and my professional opinion is that they are legally unsound. And there are questions in my mind regarding whether the first two prosecutors' handling of this case might have violated the Georgia Bar's Rules of Professional Responsibility.​

​

I am emphasizing these facts to address the impression that some people have that the homeowners took part in the McMichaels’ actions. The homeowners were shocked and deeply saddened by these events, which they learned of after-the-fact. The homeowners are parents, and they are heartsick for Mr. Arbery’s mother and father. Larry English and his family are praying for the Arberys."​

Those photos got out because of the hole
Owner lol , he was probably passing them to the neighbors

 

[progressive hunter]

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, reacts to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path circles to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance.

I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, reacts to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path circles to the front of the truck:

View attachment 335232
Last view of jogger passing the front of the truck.

About half a second after Arbery disappears from view the FIRST shot is heard but not seen. It happens in this view:

View attachment 335248
So I see a jogger hoping to run past two crazy gunmen yelling STOP STOP STOP as he runs by the truck and a split second past the truck a shot is fired from a man circling in front of him trying to block his way.

Coming back into view I see:

View attachment 335253
The two men struggle for a weapon that has already been fired. The rest of what happens is not in dispute except what you think you see.

You say Arbery, “Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires,”

Nowhere in any view when Arberry puts his hands on the weapon is the first shot fired.

.... it was fired in front of the truck.

Arberry had hands on the weapon in between the first shot and the second.

The facts mean Arbery heard the first shot as he ran past the truck with about 1/2 a second to react.

His intant reaction to the first shot (its safe to speculate) was to get the weapon to survive the ambush. He did have a chance and got a few good punches on his assailant before he was unfortunately shot and killed.

That what I see backed up by the video as it really happened.

the fact that the RUNNER saw the guy with a gun from close to 100 feet away and decided to run at him instead of running away says he wanted to confront them not get away,,,

The runner was also being pursued by a second vehicle. He was trapped between two forces.

how do you know he knew that???
and its been reported that the guy following wasnt involved,,,

and by the video you can see he had a clear escape to the right through what looks like an open field,,,

so he had many options other than confrontation,,,

 

[Faun]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Many posts ago I explained about Trespassing under Georgia law. I have never denied it. Now you think you have me. So give me a little more rope please.

Were the McMichaels going to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest according to the laws of Georgia?

well first, that means the man wasn't out for jog, so that's blown up. second you all said there wasn't a crime, well now we know their was. Third, they called the police , fourth, they were attempting to hold him until the cops got there. the blackman spoiled that intended action by struggling for the gun which ended up killing him Again, there is no need to contact police if the intent was to shoot the man.

Stop lying. You have no proof he wasn't out for a jog.

theres no proof he was,,,

Sure there is. He was dressed for jogging. He was seen jogging in the video. And his family says he was an avid jogger.

the guy in sopranos was also dressed for jogging,,,and in the video he was seen running after he left the construction site that he walked up to,,,

and if he was jogging that would mean he was on a 20 mile jog since he lived 10 miles away,,,
only marathon runners jog that much,,,does he run marathons???

hehheh Why do the liberals think jogging makes someone innocent....I guess the same way they thought walking to the store and buy skittles made Trayvon innocent. bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa where do these idiots come from? Were they born stupid or taught to be that way in our public schools???

"and if he was jogging that would mean he was on a 20 mile jog since he lived 10 miles away,,,"

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

 

[Jitss617]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Many posts ago I explained about Trespassing under Georgia law. I have never denied it. Now you think you have me. So give me a little more rope please.

Were the McMichaels going to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest according to the laws of Georgia?

well first, that means the man wasn't out for jog, so that's blown up. second you all said there wasn't a crime, well now we know their was. Third, they called the police , fourth, they were attempting to hold him until the cops got there. the blackman spoiled that intended action by struggling for the gun which ended up killing him Again, there is no need to contact police if the intent was to shoot the man.

Stop lying. You have no proof he wasn't out for a jog.

theres no proof he was,,,

The last I heard was that the msm is still running with their story the two white guys drove up on the black guy jumped out and assaulted him.....telling such lies should make them liable for some lawsuits..........well we got a lot of internet lawyers on here maybe one of them will enlighten on this matter.

Actually. That is exactly what happened. I know the MSM getting the story right is hard to believe. Perhaps you should view it like the broken clock. It is right twice a day.

not according to the video,,,in it he ran up to the guys and assaulted the son,,,

that's exactly what he did. funny, they see nothing with him trespassing and perhaps robbing that house, but they see everything wrong with a guy in the middle of the street doing absolutely nothing until the blackman runs into him. Again, the black man ran into him intentionally. the Video doesn't lie.

You need to know what Georgia Law says. The guy in the middle of the street was committing a felony. It is called Aggravated Assault. It is defined as possessing a weapon and using it in a manner which can or may cause death or injury. It is why the charge was filed against them both. They were not innocent bystanders before the scary black guy attacked. They were criminals. They were committing Felonies to try and catch a guy suspected of a misdemeanor.

Black guy is violent let me not protect my self lol are you nuts?

 

[progressive hunter]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Many posts ago I explained about Trespassing under Georgia law. I have never denied it. Now you think you have me. So give me a little more rope please.

Were the McMichaels going to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest according to the laws of Georgia?

well first, that means the man wasn't out for jog, so that's blown up. second you all said there wasn't a crime, well now we know their was. Third, they called the police , fourth, they were attempting to hold him until the cops got there. the blackman spoiled that intended action by struggling for the gun which ended up killing him Again, there is no need to contact police if the intent was to shoot the man.

Stop lying. You have no proof he wasn't out for a jog.

theres no proof he was,,,

Sure there is. He was dressed for jogging. He was seen jogging in the video. And his family says he was an avid jogger.

the guy in sopranos was also dressed for jogging,,,and in the video he was seen running after he left the construction site that he walked up to,,,

and if he was jogging that would mean he was on a 20 mile jog since he lived 10 miles away,,,
only marathon runners jog that much,,,does he run marathons???

hehheh Why do the liberals think jogging makes someone innocent....I guess the same way they thought walking to the store and buy skittles made Trayvon innocent. bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa where do these idiots come from? Were they born stupid or taught to be that way in our public schools???

"and if he was jogging that would mean he was on a 20 mile jog since he lived 10 miles away,,,"

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

View attachment 335260

I'm not a conservative and didnt lie,,,I was going off what I heard,,,

 

[Faun]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

You are wrong ., under ya law It could be vacant and it’s still a felony

Stop lying, troll. You've been shown it's not a felony unless he either stole something or intended to steal something. Neither of which can you prove.

So you think all the times he was on that property he stole nothing? Lol

LOLOL

"all those times" as in you can't prove he was ever there other than the day he was killed?

 

[Jitss617]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

You are wrong ., under ya law It could be vacant and it’s still a felony

Stop lying, troll. You've been shown it's not a felony unless he either stole something or intended to steal something. Neither of which can you prove.

So you think all the times he was on that property he stole nothing? Lol

LOLOL

"all those times" as in you can't prove he was ever there other than the day he was killed?

That’s not what I said.. I said the owner of the property probably passed out video stills of the person breaking into his property and stealing stuff.. So when the neighbors caught him in broad daylight, they had a reasonable suspicion that something he was taking place firsthand probability..

 

[Faun]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

You are wrong ., under ya law It could be vacant and it’s still a felony

Stop lying, troll. You've been shown it's not a felony unless he either stole something or intended to steal something. Neither of which can you prove.

So you think all the times he was on that property he stole nothing? Lol

Here be the rub. If nothing is missing it means he did not steal anything. Where is the victim of the theft. All those videos and none show him walking off with a hunk of 2X4.

he still committed a crime of trespassing. you still can't escape that and now we know he wasn't jogging, Doh!!!

one does not eliminate the other. A jogger can trespass.

no proof he was jogging,,,

Looked like he was jogging in a video I saw.

 

[jc456]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Many posts ago I explained about Trespassing under Georgia law. I have never denied it. Now you think you have me. So give me a little more rope please.

Were the McMichaels going to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest according to the laws of Georgia?

well first, that means the man wasn't out for jog, so that's blown up. second you all said there wasn't a crime, well now we know their was. Third, they called the police , fourth, they were attempting to hold him until the cops got there. the blackman spoiled that intended action by struggling for the gun which ended up killing him Again, there is no need to contact police if the intent was to shoot the man.

Stop lying. You have no proof he wasn't out for a jog.

theres no proof he was,,,

The last I heard was that the msm is still running with their story the two white guys drove up on the black guy jumped out and assaulted him.....telling such lies should make them liable for some lawsuits..........well we got a lot of internet lawyers on here maybe one of them will enlighten on this matter.

Actually. That is exactly what happened. I know the MSM getting the story right is hard to believe. Perhaps you should view it like the broken clock. It is right twice a day.

not according to the video,,,in it he ran up to the guys and assaulted the son,,,

that's exactly what he did. funny, they see nothing with him trespassing and perhaps robbing that house, but they see everything wrong with a guy in the middle of the street doing absolutely nothing until the blackman runs into him. Again, the black man ran into him intentionally. the Video doesn't lie.

You need to know what Georgia Law says. The guy in the middle of the street was committing a felony. It is called Aggravated Assault. It is defined as possessing a weapon and using it in a manner which can or may cause death or injury. It is why the charge was filed against them both. They were not innocent bystanders before the scary black guy attacked. They were criminals. They were committing Felonies to try and catch a guy suspected of a misdemeanor.

why? explain it to me. he was by himself. you saw the video right?

This has been posted by Faun. So here you go again. Try reading it instead of ignoring it.

Dana Loesch#1 Female Radio Host in AmericaThe Killing of Ahmaud Arbery

Consistency is important, particularly when it comes to due process. So, too, is discussion of self defense rights. I’ve seen the video of Ahmaud Arbery’s killing (a link to this video …

danaloesch.com

As it is elsewhere in the country, so too is it illegal in Georgia to point the barrel of your gun at someone, loaded or unloaded, without any legal justification.

this never happened. Video shows it didn't

 

[progressive hunter]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

You are wrong ., under ya law It could be vacant and it’s still a felony

Stop lying, troll. You've been shown it's not a felony unless he either stole something or intended to steal something. Neither of which can you prove.

So you think all the times he was on that property he stole nothing? Lol

Here be the rub. If nothing is missing it means he did not steal anything. Where is the victim of the theft. All those videos and none show him walking off with a hunk of 2X4.

he still committed a crime of trespassing. you still can't escape that and now we know he wasn't jogging, Doh!!!

one does not eliminate the other. A jogger can trespass.

no proof he was jogging,,,

Looked like he was jogging in a video I saw.

not when you combine it with the other video where he ran away when confronted for being on private property that he walked up to,,,

to my knowledge not a single person saw him actually jogging,,,only running from the house he was in,,,

 

[Faun]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Trespassing is a misdemeanor. That does not allow anyone in the state of Georgia to enforce a citizen's arrest. Even worse for the McMichaels, to perform a legally authorized citizen's arrest requires the arresting individual(s) to either have directly witnessed the crime or at least have direct knowledge of it. The McMichaels had neither.

I have told everyone that a dozen times. They are certain it is wrong. Moreover only the property owner or his representatives may press charges for Trespassing. Under the law in Georgia anyway.

Speaking of the property owner, here's what he had to say (through his attorney) on the matter...

"Mr. English wants to correct the mistaken impression that he had shared this video or any other information with the McMichaels prior to the McMichaels’ decision to chase Mr. Arbery. The homeowners had not even seen the February 23 video before Travis McMichael shot Mr. Arbery. When homeowner Larry English saw the photos of Mr. Arbery that were later broadcast, his first impression was that Mr. Arbery was not the man captured on video inside the house on February 23, and he said that to a neighbor. ​

​

​

By Wright Gazaway | May 11, 2020 at 5:32 PM EDT - Updated May 11 at 5:41 PM​

BRUNSWICK, Ga. (WTOC) - An attorney representing the homeowner of a construction site involved in the Ahmaud Arbery case issued a statement condemning the actions taken by Gregory and Travis McMichael.​

A brief surveillance clip appears to show a man that looks like Arbery inside the home minutes before he was killed on Feb. 23. A neighbor called 911 and reported someone in the home that afternoon; the home was under construction and not locked.​

Minutes later, responding officers found Arbery in the middle of the road, shot to death by Travis McMichael. Another video captured the shooting. The public release of that video last week sparked nationwide attention and calls for immediate arrests.​

The McMichaels told responding officers that they chased Arbery because they thought he was responsible for recent break-ins in the neighborhood. However, the only theft reported to police involved a gun stolen from Travis McMichael’s unlocked truck, according to reports provided to WTOC by the Glynn County Police Department.​

The revelation of this new video showing a man that looks like Arbery inside the home prompted the GBI to respond. The agency confirmed they had the video as evidence but pointed out they had it before arresting the McMichaels.​

Below is the entire statement from the homeowner’s attorney, J. Elizabeth Graddy:​

"Mr. English wants to correct the mistaken impression that he had shared this video or any other information with the McMichaels prior to the McMichaels’ decision to chase Mr. Arbery. The homeowners had not even seen the February 23 video before Travis McMichael shot Mr. Arbery. When homeowner Larry English saw the photos of Mr. Arbery that were later broadcast, his first impression was that Mr. Arbery was not the man captured on video inside the house on February 23, and he said that to a neighbor.​

​

In the months prior to February 23, a motion-activated camera had captured videos of someone inside the house (which was and remains a construction site) at night. Mr. English has never said that Mr. Arbery was the person or persons in those videos, and he does not see a resemblance now. After the first time that video captured someone in the house, Mr. English contacted local law enforcement on a non-emergency number and made them aware of the unauthorized entry onto his property. He never used the word "burglary." He never shared any of this information with the McMichaels, whom he did not even know. Nothing was ever stolen from the house -- which, again, was a construction site. Even if there had been a robbery, however, the English family would not have wanted a vigilante response. They would have entrusted the matter to law enforcement authorities. On February 23, the English family was two hours away from the Satilla Shores neighborhood andwas unaware of the tragedy that was unfolding. Mr. English was not the one who called 911 on February 23. The only crime that the homeowner has seen captured on video is the senseless killing of Mr. Arbery.​

​

As a native of South Georgia and an attorney, I personally was following this story in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution prior to the release of the video of the shooting. Based solely on Gregory McMichael's reported statement, my professional opinion was that this was a murder, possibly a capital murder. After seeing the video of the shooting, I wrote to Tom Durdin, the prosecutor to whom the case had been assigned, and expressed that opinion and asked why the McMichaels had not been arrested. I reviewed the published letters written by the two prosecutors who previously handled the case, and my professional opinion is that they are legally unsound. And there are questions in my mind regarding whether the first two prosecutors' handling of this case might have violated the Georgia Bar's Rules of Professional Responsibility.​

​

I am emphasizing these facts to address the impression that some people have that the homeowners took part in the McMichaels’ actions. The homeowners were shocked and deeply saddened by these events, which they learned of after-the-fact. The homeowners are parents, and they are heartsick for Mr. Arbery’s mother and father. Larry English and his family are praying for the Arberys."​

Those photos got out because of the hole
Owner lol , he was probably passing them to the neighbors

LOL

Every time you say, "probably," it's followed by bullshit.

I just posted how the homeowner said he did not give those photos to the McMichaels, did not know them and isn't from around there.

 

[Jitss617]

Jogging lol that’s funny

 

[Faun]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Many posts ago I explained about Trespassing under Georgia law. I have never denied it. Now you think you have me. So give me a little more rope please.

Were the McMichaels going to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest according to the laws of Georgia?

well first, that means the man wasn't out for jog, so that's blown up. second you all said there wasn't a crime, well now we know their was. Third, they called the police , fourth, they were attempting to hold him until the cops got there. the blackman spoiled that intended action by struggling for the gun which ended up killing him Again, there is no need to contact police if the intent was to shoot the man.

Stop lying. You have no proof he wasn't out for a jog.

theres no proof he was,,,

The last I heard was that the msm is still running with their story the two white guys drove up on the black guy jumped out and assaulted him.....telling such lies should make them liable for some lawsuits..........well we got a lot of internet lawyers on here maybe one of them will enlighten on this matter.

Actually. That is exactly what happened. I know the MSM getting the story right is hard to believe. Perhaps you should view it like the broken clock. It is right twice a day.

not according to the video,,,in it he ran up to the guys and assaulted the son,,,

that's exactly what he did. funny, they see nothing with him trespassing and perhaps robbing that house, but they see everything wrong with a guy in the middle of the street doing absolutely nothing until the blackman runs into him. Again, the black man ran into him intentionally. the Video doesn't lie.

You need to know what Georgia Law says. The guy in the middle of the street was committing a felony. It is called Aggravated Assault. It is defined as possessing a weapon and using it in a manner which can or may cause death or injury. It is why the charge was filed against them both. They were not innocent bystanders before the scary black guy attacked. They were criminals. They were committing Felonies to try and catch a guy suspected of a misdemeanor.

Black guy is violent let me not protect my self lol are you nuts?

By "violent," you mean fighting for his life.

 

[Faun]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

So now we are down to what they knew. Ok. So now the video is not enough and we need more information. Fine. Is stealing a crime in Georgia? And should the Georgia law apply?

Breaking and entering to steal is a felony. They were trying to slow him down till the police came

Well one or two little issues. First the house was open so it was not breaking and entering. It was Trespass under Georgia law. Second. There is no evidence that he was actually stealing. No one has come forward even now months later to report anything missing. It is gratifying however to hear you admit there are laws and they should apply.

Now to the intent of the McMichaels. You say detain. There is only one legal way they could detain anyone. That is by Citizens Arrest. Are you saying they were intending to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest until the police arrived?

trespassing is a crime. So now you admit he committed a crime.

Many posts ago I explained about Trespassing under Georgia law. I have never denied it. Now you think you have me. So give me a little more rope please.

Were the McMichaels going to place Ahmad under Citizens Arrest according to the laws of Georgia?

well first, that means the man wasn't out for jog, so that's blown up. second you all said there wasn't a crime, well now we know their was. Third, they called the police , fourth, they were attempting to hold him until the cops got there. the blackman spoiled that intended action by struggling for the gun which ended up killing him Again, there is no need to contact police if the intent was to shoot the man.

Stop lying. You have no proof he wasn't out for a jog.

theres no proof he was,,,

Sure there is. He was dressed for jogging. He was seen jogging in the video. And his family says he was an avid jogger.

the guy in sopranos was also dressed for jogging,,,and in the video he was seen running after he left the construction site that he walked up to,,,

and if he was jogging that would mean he was on a 20 mile jog since he lived 10 miles away,,,
only marathon runners jog that much,,,does he run marathons???

hehheh Why do the liberals think jogging makes someone innocent....I guess the same way they thought walking to the store and buy skittles made Trayvon innocent. bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa where do these idiots come from? Were they born stupid or taught to be that way in our public schools???

"and if he was jogging that would mean he was on a 20 mile jog since he lived 10 miles away,,,"

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

View attachment 335260

I'm not a conservative and didnt lie,,,I was going off what I heard,,,

Oh? Where did you hear he lived 10 miles away?