New development in the shooting case of the black georgia jogger

[Faun]

it hasnt been proven he was a jogger

What authority will tell us if he is a walker, jogger, skipper, runner? I see a video and I see a young man jogging until he gets shot dead by a shooter.

What is the proper white extremist adjective for jogging while black?

‘Musta stole sumthin!!!

I thought he was running away from the rednecks???

and not a single person has come forward and said they saw him jogging,,only running away from an empty house that he walked up to,,,

I see him jogging in this video up until he reaches the truck. Who knows what you see differently?

"jogging"

LOL

Watch the video... not a single running step taken before breaking into property.

View attachment 335319

You mean in the 30 feet leading up to the driveway? That's your evidence he wasn't jogging? How does that reveal what he was doing prior to entering the frame of that video?

 

[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?

No. I am and many other are telling you the law. The law that has seen the McMichaels charged with Aggravated Assault. Nobody is lying to you. The law which the Glynn County Police wanted to apply says what it says.

but they aren't guilty yet. so what?

It is why they were arrested. They were wrong.

they were arrested because of pressure at the DA's office

They were arrested because video surfaced which proved they lied to police about what actually happened.

 

[progressive hunter]

...so, the evil whites were NOT WRONG in going after him...I thought at first they had no reason....but they did.....should they have? probably not...follow, get a picture/etc

They were not only wrong they were breaking the law when they grabbed their guns and went after Arbery as they said to make a ‘citizens arrest,’

They had to witness a felony in person as it took place; not on tape.

The law is settled. If you still think they were not wrong to kill a man over a minute visit in an open structure.

Yes, they decided to kill him if he did not stop jogging at their command at gunpoint.

thats a far cry from your suggestion “follow get a picture. I agree with that, but my god How can you suggest that what we saw them do was not wrong.

They set up an illegal armed roadblock to stop a free non-dangerous citizen from jogging.

And they are not wrong you say?

the young man stops for three minutes in an open construction site building and takes a look and he is wrong to the point that two men were right to chase him and shoot him if he did not do as he was told.
Why

--AAbery did something that could be seen as stealing---m

The two white guts did somthing that gir them arrested for aggravated assault and murder over nothing. That young man did.

he was f$&6;Ing jogging in shorts and T-shirts. and the white me bring a shotgun to make him pull that 8 in Skilsaw out of his left back pocket.

Drive along side nicely with no fucking shotgun sticking out the window and ask What were you doing in there kid” and when he says “I dunno just looking around” so smile and say “You probably should not go there - the owner is asshole ya know what I mean.you don’t to git yer self hurt.”

thats how real adults behave.

and say “ have a nice day” instead of spending the rest of your life in prison for shooting an unarmed young black man for not stopping to talk to you at gunpoint.

You think the kid was dumb?

my god what about those two ignorant dumbass shooters? they had the power to deescalate not the kid. they belong in prison now. they are Too ignorant and dangerous to be be free. Shooting an unarmed kid in shorts and tee shirt and running shoes.

I wouldn’t think anyone could be so deprived of conscience as to support the killers and trash the kid.

..AA was very dumb---going INTO a structure--WTF FOR!!!!??????-to STEAL or steal later
I wouldn’t think anyone could be so deprived of conscience as to support a criminal and trash law and order

I have been talking about the law. And in Georgia the ones breaking the law most severely even before the shots were fired was the McMichaels.

He had not committed a burglary. There was nothing at the construction site small enough to carry with him while wearing shorts and a t shirt concealed. Ok. He might had had half a dozen nails. But that is literally the limit. And odds are heavily against him stealing anything.

There had not been a burglary since Christmas in the neighborhood. So there was no current crime wave or even recent, say within the last two months, that justified going out armed to hunt down the possible suspects.

Finally. They did not know the owners of the property. The owners have said they never talked to the McMichaels. There was no way for the McMichaels to know who this guy was. He might have been the owner, or a relative, or friend and was authorized to be there.

..he INITIATED the problem by going where he shouldn't
.....it's just like a stranger going into someone's garage and then running out..it is common sense to think he stole something

Under Georgia Law it isn’t enough to think. You have to see them commit the crime for Citizens Arrest. Otherwise you are liable criminally and civilly.

thats not all of what the law says,,,

Yes, the law says you must see them commit a felony. None of that happened.

it says more than that as I pointed out earlier when someone posted the text of the law,,,

Nope. You are in error.

Did you read this:

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

yes I did read it and no the law says more than just eye witness the crime as I pointed out earlier when the text of the law was posted,,,

So how did they witness a felony, if one did not occur?

read the law,,eye witness is not the only criteria,,,

 

[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..

If that were the case, why would they go after Arbery since he's not the man in those photos?

How do you know he’s not?

Because I have functioning eyes.

..at first I thought the WHITE guys were wrong...but we see AA doing something wrong...and it CLEARLY looks like he wants to steal something

Yet, you have NOTHING to prove he actually did steal something. Correct?

He doesn't even have proof Arbery wanted to steal something.

He stole a hammer. It’s in the video

Great, post a photo of him stealing a hammer ....

That post doesn't show him stealing a hammer. Thanks for admitting you're full of shit.

Shows him
Coming around a car to attack the hero

Dumbfuck, you posted that in response to me challenging you to post a photo of him stealing a hammer.

What you posted in response to that has nothing to do with a hammer.

Have you always been this retarded??

How many times do I need to show you the hammer

 

[Faun]

...so, the evil whites were NOT WRONG in going after him...I thought at first they had no reason....but they did.....should they have? probably not...follow, get a picture/etc

They were not only wrong they were breaking the law when they grabbed their guns and went after Arbery as they said to make a ‘citizens arrest,’

They had to witness a felony in person as it took place; not on tape.

The law is settled. If you still think they were not wrong to kill a man over a minute visit in an open structure.

Yes, they decided to kill him if he did not stop jogging at their command at gunpoint.

thats a far cry from your suggestion “follow get a picture. I agree with that, but my god How can you suggest that what we saw them do was not wrong.

They set up an illegal armed roadblock to stop a free non-dangerous citizen from jogging.

And they are not wrong you say?

the young man stops for three minutes in an open construction site building and takes a look and he is wrong to the point that two men were right to chase him and shoot him if he did not do as he was told.
Why

--AAbery did something that could be seen as stealing---m

The two white guts did somthing that gir them arrested for aggravated assault and murder over nothing. That young man did.

he was f$&6;Ing jogging in shorts and T-shirts. and the white me bring a shotgun to make him pull that 8 in Skilsaw out of his left back pocket.

Drive along side nicely with no fucking shotgun sticking out the window and ask What were you doing in there kid” and when he says “I dunno just looking around” so smile and say “You probably should not go there - the owner is asshole ya know what I mean.you don’t to git yer self hurt.”

thats how real adults behave.

and say “ have a nice day” instead of spending the rest of your life in prison for shooting an unarmed young black man for not stopping to talk to you at gunpoint.

You think the kid was dumb?

my god what about those two ignorant dumbass shooters? they had the power to deescalate not the kid. they belong in prison now. they are Too ignorant and dangerous to be be free. Shooting an unarmed kid in shorts and tee shirt and running shoes.

I wouldn’t think anyone could be so deprived of conscience as to support the killers and trash the kid.

..AA was very dumb---going INTO a structure--WTF FOR!!!!??????-to STEAL or steal later
I wouldn’t think anyone could be so deprived of conscience as to support a criminal and trash law and order

I have been talking about the law. And in Georgia the ones breaking the law most severely even before the shots were fired was the McMichaels.

He had not committed a burglary. There was nothing at the construction site small enough to carry with him while wearing shorts and a t shirt concealed. Ok. He might had had half a dozen nails. But that is literally the limit. And odds are heavily against him stealing anything.

There had not been a burglary since Christmas in the neighborhood. So there was no current crime wave or even recent, say within the last two months, that justified going out armed to hunt down the possible suspects.

Finally. They did not know the owners of the property. The owners have said they never talked to the McMichaels. There was no way for the McMichaels to know who this guy was. He might have been the owner, or a relative, or friend and was authorized to be there.

..he INITIATED the problem by going where he shouldn't
.....it's just like a stranger going into someone's garage and then running out..it is common sense to think he stole something

Under Georgia Law it isn’t enough to think. You have to see them commit the crime for Citizens Arrest. Otherwise you are liable criminally and civilly.

Still stuck on the citizens arrest b.s.

Let me cut to the chase here.......say the white dudes did make a citizens arrest....or tried to make a citizens arrest of course most know neither event happened.....but for arguments sake say one or the other or both occurred.

Do you think that would give AA the right to assault the son?

i'm disturbed that the black guy attacked a white man standing in the street minding his own business.

LOLOL

That's what you think people do to mind their own business? They stop their vehicle in the middle of a road and stand guard with a shotgun?

 

[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?

No. I am and many other are telling you the law. The law that has seen the McMichaels charged with Aggravated Assault. Nobody is lying to you. The law which the Glynn County Police wanted to apply says what it says.

but they aren't guilty yet. so what?

It is why they were arrested. They were wrong.

They only got arrested because of a black racist female that took over the case.. they will be released soon, I hope they sue the black biatch

Actually they were arrested when a White Guy was in charge. But what are facts for you irrational hatred.

One is white one is a black female

 

[progressive hunter]

it hasnt been proven he was a jogger

What authority will tell us if he is a walker, jogger, skipper, runner? I see a video and I see a young man jogging until he gets shot dead by a shooter.

What is the proper white extremist adjective for jogging while black?

‘Musta stole sumthin!!!

I thought he was running away from the rednecks???

and not a single person has come forward and said they saw him jogging,,only running away from an empty house that he walked up to,,,

I see him jogging in this video up until he reaches the truck. Who knows what you see differently?

"jogging"

LOL

Watch the video... not a single running step taken before breaking into property.

View attachment 335319

You mean in the 30 feet leading up to the driveway? That's your evidence he wasn't jogging? How does that reveal what he was doing prior to entering the frame of that video?

sure doesnt mean he was jogging,,,
has anyone come forward and say they saw him jogging???

 

[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?

No. I am and many other are telling you the law. The law that has seen the McMichaels charged with Aggravated Assault. Nobody is lying to you. The law which the Glynn County Police wanted to apply says what it says.

but they aren't guilty yet. so what?

It is why they were arrested. They were wrong.

they were arrested because of pressure at the DA's office

They were arrested because video surfaced which proved they lied to police about what actually happened.

What lie?

 

[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?

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..

If that were the case, why would they go after Arbery since he's not the man in those photos?

How do you know he’s not?

Because I have functioning eyes.

..at first I thought the WHITE guys were wrong...but we see AA doing something wrong...and it CLEARLY looks like he wants to steal something

Yet, you have NOTHING to prove he actually did steal something. Correct?

He doesn't even have proof Arbery wanted to steal something.

He stole a hammer. It’s in the video

Great, post a photo of him stealing a hammer ....

That post doesn't show him stealing a hammer. Thanks for admitting you're full of shit.

Shows him
Coming around a car to attack the hero

Dumbfuck, you posted that in response to me challenging you to post a photo of him stealing a hammer.

What you posted in response to that has nothing to do with a hammer.

Have you always been this retarded??

View attachment 335341How many times do I need to show you the hammer

That's a fuzzy object that can be anything and was already on the ground when Arbery jogged past it.

But more to the point -- you said he was on video stealing a hammer.

"He stole a hammer. It’s in the video"​

Post a photo of him stealing a hammer ...

 

[Ame®icano]

it hasnt been proven he was a jogger

What authority will tell us if he is a walker, jogger, skipper, runner? I see a video and I see a young man jogging until he gets shot dead by a shooter.

What is the proper white extremist adjective for jogging while black?

‘Musta stole sumthin!!!

I thought he was running away from the rednecks???

and not a single person has come forward and said they saw him jogging,,only running away from an empty house that he walked up to,,,

I see him jogging in this video up until he reaches the truck. Who knows what you see differently?

so you see him running for maybe 100 feet and you call that jogging????

I thought at that point he was running away from the rednecks after their last encounter???

Looks like jogging to me.

Hey look, buncha joggers...

 

[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..

If that were the case, why would they go after Arbery since he's not the man in those photos?

How do you know he’s not?

Because I have functioning eyes.

..at first I thought the WHITE guys were wrong...but we see AA doing something wrong...and it CLEARLY looks like he wants to steal something

Yet, you have NOTHING to prove he actually did steal something. Correct?

He doesn't even have proof Arbery wanted to steal something.

He stole a hammer. It’s in the video

Great, post a photo of him stealing a hammer ....

That post doesn't show him stealing a hammer. Thanks for admitting you're full of shit.

Shows him
Coming around a car to attack the hero

Dumbfuck, you posted that in response to me challenging you to post a photo of him stealing a hammer.

What you posted in response to that has nothing to do with a hammer.

Have you always been this retarded??

View attachment 335341How many times do I need to show you the hammer

That's a fuzzy object that can be anything and was already on the ground when Arbery jogged past it.

But more to the point -- you said he was on video stealing a hammer.

"He stole a hammer. It’s in the video"​

Post a photo of him stealing a hammer ...

Well who goes jogging with a hammer?

 

[Jitss617]

it hasnt been proven he was a jogger

What authority will tell us if he is a walker, jogger, skipper, runner? I see a video and I see a young man jogging until he gets shot dead by a shooter.

What is the proper white extremist adjective for jogging while black?

‘Musta stole sumthin!!!

I thought he was running away from the rednecks???

and not a single person has come forward and said they saw him jogging,,only running away from an empty house that he walked up to,,,

I see him jogging in this video up until he reaches the truck. Who knows what you see differently?

so you see him running for maybe 100 feet and you call that jogging????

I thought at that point he was running away from the rednecks after their last encounter???

Looks like jogging to me.

Hey look, buncha joggers...

View attachment 335343

Blahhhhh hahahahhaha hahahha

 

[Canon Shooter]

72# reply to 71#1414

But YOU DON'T HAVE any fact to demonstrate otherwise. You have no fact to demonstrate that Arbery did not attack McMichael, or that McMichal did not shoot in self-defense.

Your reply to Canon Shooter has a serious problem. I have presented facts to you direct that do demonstrate that McMichael was attacking Arbery as the first shot was fired in front of the truck and when McMichael and his shotgun were on the right side of the double yellow line:

View attachment 335151
Arbury seen jogging near the front of the truck.

Half a second later the first shot is fired.
View attachment 335150
Red Arrow points to McMichael’d white cap.
Blue Arrow points to Arbery’s white shirt.

That is the position of the two men when first shot was fired.

SavannahMann in case you are interested.

OK. Let’s get to that. You know that in airplane crashes the accident is not the crash. The crash is where the plane ended up after the accident. So how did they get there?

The event does not begin when the first shot is fired. That is the end result of a lot of questionable and illegal decisions. The first shot is not the start. It is the result. The start is when the two McMorons decided to arm up and chase down and stop a guy.

OH absolutely. I don’t see a self defense case at all according to the law because both of the gunmen were the aggressors the second they set their hands on the weapons and set out to apprehend an unarmed suspect for a felony they did not witness.

I’m merely pointing out that the white extremist argument that it was Arbery’s aggression that justifies a case for self defense by the shooter is just as bogus as the ‘jogging in construction boots’ claims were.

The photo shows that the man armed with the shot gun was committing aggravated assault in the direction of the jogger when the first shot was fired.

He was not just standing by out of the way when Arbery was in full view struggling for the wespon that had already
been fired once.

What garbage, what nonsense, what ignorance and what lies you post....have you no shame?

Or are you just toooooooooo stupid to realize what you are dong?

You concoted some photos and drawings to deceive yourself(but no one else) and ran with it and you cannot stop running with it even though your theory has been debunked.
You have no evidence whatsoever to support what you think.

I asked you to watch the video and tell the board the exact time of the first shot in the video....you could not do that even though the timing on the video as it counted down the seconds was plainly visible....why did you refuse to do that ?because when you watched the video you realized you were wrong...that it destroyed your theory of the white guy with the shotgun crossing over to the other side of the truck and attacking the black dude....thus your b.s. is debunked and you know it.

Because the Video is not the start of the event. For that we have to use McMichael’s own statement to police. The shot is not the start of the event. You can’t start from there. It is like claiming that none of the Touchdowns scored by the other team count because they were in the first half.

The start is irrelevant............the only issue in this case is the assault of the white dude....that is all there is to this case........period....all the rest is just conjecture, lying, persona opinions aka b.s. mixed in with gross ignorance of the law.

So it does not matter what preceded. The only thing that matters is that the black guy attacked the person with the gun. Ok. Why was the person with a gun in the middle of the street? If we are going to start with that doesn’t it make him a potential mass shooter and a danger to everyone right? I mean if we are going to start from that moment then we have to ignore why and just make an assumption right?

Again the only thing of consequence and importance in this case is the assault of the white guy with the shotgun by the black criminal nut case.

All the rest is irrelevant hyperbole.

Although you could claim they are illegally parked....call the Poehleeece and demand they be given a parking ticket. hehheh

Again the only thing of consequence and importance in this case is the murder of the black guy with the shotgun by the white racist asshole..

All the rest is irrelevant hyperbole.

There! I fixed it for you!

what murder, the black man had his hands on the shot gun and directly caused the gun to fire. watch the video once.

Grasping a shotgun does not cause it to fire, nor does it cause a person to fire two more rounds.

sure it does if finger's on a trigger when the person grabs it from your control. squeezing to hold the gun most likely also squeezed the trigger. so you don't see the black man with hands on the gun struggle to whip it out of the guys control? he's spinning the gun back and forth. I am amazed at the number of blind fks in here.

Why was his finger on the trigger unless he intended to shoot some one?

Is that against the law?

Any gun safety class you will ever take will tell you that your finger remains off the trigger until you're ready to shoot something.

Not that you would know that, because it's abundantly clear that you know nothing about guns, gun ownership or guns safety.

Oh, wait, that's right. That's because you're a felon...

 

[MacTheKnife]

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?

No. I am and many other are telling you the law. The law that has seen the McMichaels charged with Aggravated Assault. Nobody is lying to you. The law which the Glynn County Police wanted to apply says what it says.

You can cite the law but you lack the intelligence to properly interpet it.

 

[Faun]

it hasnt been proven he was a jogger

What authority will tell us if he is a walker, jogger, skipper, runner? I see a video and I see a young man jogging until he gets shot dead by a shooter.

What is the proper white extremist adjective for jogging while black?

‘Musta stole sumthin!!!

I thought he was running away from the rednecks???

and not a single person has come forward and said they saw him jogging,,only running away from an empty house that he walked up to,,,

I see him jogging in this video up until he reaches the truck. Who knows what you see differently?

"jogging"

LOL

Watch the video... not a single running step taken before breaking into property.

View attachment 335319

You mean in the 30 feet leading up to the driveway? That's your evidence he wasn't jogging? How does that reveal what he was doing prior to entering the frame of that video?

sure doesnt mean he was jogging,,,
has anyone come forward and say they saw him jogging???

Yes, anybody with a functioning brain who watched the video with him jogging.

 

[Jitss617]

Does anybody know how uncomfortable it is to jog with khakis on. FOR 20 MILES!? Lol untied shoes. My balls would be so soggy lol

 

[Canon Shooter]

The white folk should be out marching in the streets....

Decent "white folk" understand that this was not a c ase of self defense but, rather, the hunting and the killing of an unarmed man.

Where are all of the white racist protesters who support these guys? Where are they?

This idiot was almost living in the place! These are all break in with reported stolen items every time, the whole neighborhood knew thisView attachment 335208

Do you have a link to the information from those break ins and thefts?

Because I don't believe the police do.

Regardless, even if he stole everything in the place, it does nothing to exonerate the McMichael pair or even mitigate the severity of what they did.

Not even a little bit...

 

[Jitss617]

72# reply to 71#1414

But YOU DON'T HAVE any fact to demonstrate otherwise. You have no fact to demonstrate that Arbery did not attack McMichael, or that McMichal did not shoot in self-defense.

Your reply to Canon Shooter has a serious problem. I have presented facts to you direct that do demonstrate that McMichael was attacking Arbery as the first shot was fired in front of the truck and when McMichael and his shotgun were on the right side of the double yellow line:

View attachment 335151
Arbury seen jogging near the front of the truck.

Half a second later the first shot is fired.
View attachment 335150
Red Arrow points to McMichael’d white cap.
Blue Arrow points to Arbery’s white shirt.

That is the position of the two men when first shot was fired.

SavannahMann in case you are interested.

OK. Let’s get to that. You know that in airplane crashes the accident is not the crash. The crash is where the plane ended up after the accident. So how did they get there?

The event does not begin when the first shot is fired. That is the end result of a lot of questionable and illegal decisions. The first shot is not the start. It is the result. The start is when the two McMorons decided to arm up and chase down and stop a guy.

OH absolutely. I don’t see a self defense case at all according to the law because both of the gunmen were the aggressors the second they set their hands on the weapons and set out to apprehend an unarmed suspect for a felony they did not witness.

I’m merely pointing out that the white extremist argument that it was Arbery’s aggression that justifies a case for self defense by the shooter is just as bogus as the ‘jogging in construction boots’ claims were.

The photo shows that the man armed with the shot gun was committing aggravated assault in the direction of the jogger when the first shot was fired.

He was not just standing by out of the way when Arbery was in full view struggling for the wespon that had already
been fired once.

What garbage, what nonsense, what ignorance and what lies you post....have you no shame?

Or are you just toooooooooo stupid to realize what you are dong?

You concoted some photos and drawings to deceive yourself(but no one else) and ran with it and you cannot stop running with it even though your theory has been debunked.
You have no evidence whatsoever to support what you think.

I asked you to watch the video and tell the board the exact time of the first shot in the video....you could not do that even though the timing on the video as it counted down the seconds was plainly visible....why did you refuse to do that ?because when you watched the video you realized you were wrong...that it destroyed your theory of the white guy with the shotgun crossing over to the other side of the truck and attacking the black dude....thus your b.s. is debunked and you know it.

Because the Video is not the start of the event. For that we have to use McMichael’s own statement to police. The shot is not the start of the event. You can’t start from there. It is like claiming that none of the Touchdowns scored by the other team count because they were in the first half.

The start is irrelevant............the only issue in this case is the assault of the white dude....that is all there is to this case........period....all the rest is just conjecture, lying, persona opinions aka b.s. mixed in with gross ignorance of the law.

So it does not matter what preceded. The only thing that matters is that the black guy attacked the person with the gun. Ok. Why was the person with a gun in the middle of the street? If we are going to start with that doesn’t it make him a potential mass shooter and a danger to everyone right? I mean if we are going to start from that moment then we have to ignore why and just make an assumption right?

Again the only thing of consequence and importance in this case is the assault of the white guy with the shotgun by the black criminal nut case.

All the rest is irrelevant hyperbole.

Although you could claim they are illegally parked....call the Poehleeece and demand they be given a parking ticket. hehheh

Again the only thing of consequence and importance in this case is the murder of the black guy with the shotgun by the white racist asshole..

All the rest is irrelevant hyperbole.

There! I fixed it for you!

what murder, the black man had his hands on the shot gun and directly caused the gun to fire. watch the video once.

Grasping a shotgun does not cause it to fire, nor does it cause a person to fire two more rounds.

sure it does if finger's on a trigger when the person grabs it from your control. squeezing to hold the gun most likely also squeezed the trigger. so you don't see the black man with hands on the gun struggle to whip it out of the guys control? he's spinning the gun back and forth. I am amazed at the number of blind fks in here.

Why was his finger on the trigger unless he intended to shoot some one?

Is that against the law?

Any gun safety class you will ever take will tell you that your finger remains off the trigger until you're ready to shoot something.

Not that you would know that, because it's abundantly clear that you know nothing about guns, gun ownership or guns safety.

Oh, wait, that's right. That's because you're a felon...

I hope he was ready to shoot he was being charged by a fucking assailant! He held back until the last second

 

[Canon Shooter]

Does anybody know how uncomfortable it is to jog with khakis on. FOR 20 MILES!? Lol untied shoes. My balls would be so soggy lol

Your balls get soggy because Mommy never changes your diaper...

 

[Coyote]

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..

If that were the case, why would they go after Arbery since he's not the man in those photos?

How do you know he’s not?

Because I have functioning eyes.

..at first I thought the WHITE guys were wrong...but we see AA doing something wrong...and it CLEARLY looks like he wants to steal something

Yet, you have NOTHING to prove he actually did steal something. Correct?

He doesn't even have proof Arbery wanted to steal something.

He stole a hammer. It’s in the video

Great, post a photo of him stealing a hammer ....

That post doesn't show him stealing a hammer. Thanks for admitting you're full of shit.

Shows him
Coming around a car to attack the hero

Dumbfuck, you posted that in response to me challenging you to post a photo of him stealing a hammer.

What you posted in response to that has nothing to do with a hammer.

Have you always been this retarded??

View attachment 335341How many times do I need to show you the hammer

Looks like a stick.