A Miscarriage of Justice

Racism had nothing to do with it. Only reality. Blacks only make up 12.7 to 13.4% of our population. But they are responsible for about 38% of the crime that happens. And the more serious the crime, such as murder or armed robbery, the likelihood that a black committed it goes WAY up! (If only I would be allowed to speak of such truths here) Also, didn't you read that website about the facts about arbery that the jury (probably) wouldn't be allowed to hear? In it they said that arbery had been casing the 220 Stailla Drive property for weeks. (And probably others as well) I myself have seen at least 4 pictures taken from security cameras at different times showing arbery being where he wasn't supposed to be.

Also, though the video isn't very long, they show when the McMichaels first pulled up next to arbery in front of the place he was casing. The jury probably wasn't allowed to see it either. As soon as they spoke to him, he darted off like a rabbit. (Or like a ************) That just screams guilt to me. No sane person could think that the McMichaels should have viewed him as anything other than a suspect. But you are right. There was indeed much racism going on. In the trial. And it was directed against Whites. You also share in this racism with your accusations. How do you think you should be punished. You seem to be ok with what the McMichaels and Bryan got. After all, as you said, they "are responsible" for what they got.

 

Ah. Trolling here along with that "american" message board I see. Did you even bother to read my thread? Or read the website I posted a link to? I didn't think so.

 

I believe the jury and judge punished them for racism. That really seems to be the only explanation. The view is that if the three had not let racism influence their decision to chase Arbery in the first place, he would not be dead. Therefore they are to blame for the death because racism is so despicable. Some reasoning like that.

(Of course that is illogical. But this is not about logic, it is about emotion)


Remember, about 2 months after he was arrested, William Bryan was willing to testify that Travis McMichael said "F(*)(*)(*)ing n(*)(*)(*)(*)r" right after he had shot Arbery. (Something that I still suspect may likely have not actually happened, and Bryan may have been pressured into saying this, trying to save his own hide) This no doubt deeply prejudiced the jury against Travis, and probably the other two as well, especially combined with the confederate flag sticker that was on the bumper of their truck.

(It is bordering on being a conspiracy theory, but I suspect the prosecutor may have dangled the possibility of a plea bargain or something in front of Bryan if he was willing to give testimony that would help the prosecutor win the case. So Bryan may have been willing to throw the McMichaels under the bus to try to save himself, even though it did not end up happening that way)

 

From what I hear, the jury saw the same video that I posted. It clearly showed arbery attacking Travis. Travis even basically said as a witness that the fear he had of arbery actually managing to get his gun and most likely kill him caused him to think of his family. There was no question that Travis was defending his life. But the jury didn't see it that way. Apparently they thought that he should have let arbery take his gun and put his life in serious danger. With that being the case, no kind of evidence against arbery or in favor of the McMichaels or Brain would have been likely changed the jury's verdict. Their verdict was being beamed from the eyes of jesse jackson from the gallery. American Whites have been so pussified that they dared not disobey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

As I said, they weren't in actuality punished for racism. Their punishment came from racism directed against them. As for Bryan, maybe he did try to make a deal as you said. If that was the case, then he actually did deserve the punishment he got. For being a rat fink.

 

Yes, look at his face during the sentencing. He is the only one that almost breaks into tears.
Maybe as if he knows that he is the one responsible for getting the McMichaels sentenced to life in prison with his false testimony, and his lie didn't even provide any benefit to himself like he had hoped. That look on his face is one of guilt (it almost seems like).
And why should he feel so guilty since he was the least guilty out of the three? Is it because he lied in court about Travis using the N-word? Betraying his neighbors. With nothing even to show for it.

If Bryan was not trying to save his own hide with that testimony, why would he have even said it? If anything, wouldn't making Travis look like a racist kind of rub off on all of them in a bad way too?
I think he would only have said that if he thought it could help himself. And that likely would only be if the prosecutor had insinuated an offer of a plea bargain or preferred treatment, to which Bryan was trying to get for himself with that testimony.

I realize this post is very speculative, but if he had lied about that testimony, his tearful guilty expression when his sentencing was pronounced would totally be consistent and make sense.

 

You sir are full of crap. Arbery's being a criminal had everything to do with why the McMichaels confronted him to begin with. As far as the jury was allowed to hear, arbery was a "good boy" and just out for an innocent jog and minding his own business. THAT no doubt influenced the jury's decision. They should have been allowed to hear the facts about arbery. You can't reach a fair decision until you hear both sides of the story.

As for the Rittenhouse thing, if being a "perve" could be directly linked to his actions or the reason behind them, they should be allowed to be heard by a jury. Because when science shows that having certain traits are likely to cause certain actions, they become relevant in that case.

 

I can tell you wish the dark humans dead.

 

I know it for certain.

 

Because it seems the jury may have punished Travis for something that was not a crime.

In the judges closing statements during the sentencing, he seems to hold the McMichaels words during the incident against them, as if that revealed insight into their frame of mind.

If the court punished someone for something and does not give a coherent explanation that seems to logically explain the rationale for the punishment, then we can only presume the court is punishing the defendants for things which are not actually legal, and so it is only fair to make arguments around that.

 

Freedom of speech is a fantasy. From what I have found out, especially at political forums. So basically, it is a "crime." Also, why was the word supposedly being used by Travis allowed to be heard by the jury. Wasn't it just his right to say under "free speech?" As for my using the word "it," if only I was allowed to tell you. But here's the thing. You likely wouldn't want to hear the truth. Having heard it, you would wish that you hadn't.

 

Your thread is about me, well I'll be....But the killers got what they deserve, life-no parole. I am sure a great Southern gentleman governor will give them a pardon because he's white.

 

Run Away!!! Run Away!!!

 

That's right. Why should the jury have been allowed to hear that, and not be allowed to hear about all of Arbery's personal information?

Why is it okay to prejudice the jury against Travis but not Arbery?

 

I disagree. His suspicious behavior at the time had everything to do with McMichaels confronting him.

It's clear he wasn't on a jog. He was wearing work boots people don't go out for a jog wearing work boots. It doesn't matter what he was doing. The McMichaels have every right to follow and confront him.

It doesn't matter if he's a good little innocent boy picking daisies or a gang banger. If he puts his hand on a person's gun they are justified in using Force to stop him from taking it. That's why who he was and what he did in the past aren't relevant to the court.

Juries are idiots. There is nothing to determine whether a juror will find guilty or not on the basis of anything.

If I was the defense I would have objected to the immaterial arguments.

As for the Rittenhouse thing, if being a "perve" could be directly linked to his actions or the reason behind them, they should be allowed to be heard by a jury.[/QUOTE] But Kyle didn't know that. You can only judge Kyle's actions in what he knew at the time. It wouldn't matter if Rosenbaum had just killed nine children or rescued a bus full of nuns. The actions that occurred would still be justified.

It was the decision on whether or not Kyle murdered somebody. Not if the people he killed deserved it. Im not shedding a single tear because there is one less pedophile in the world.

 

I can tell you do not care at all about justice.

 

No, I think the governor will throw these men under the bus, because he doesn't want to rock the boat. It's too politically dangerous to touch.

 

I'll just do what I did before. Ignore you.

 

Carry on then..

 

Considering how it went down they got what they deserve. Now they can learn to survive in the penitentiary.

 

Have any actual arguments, or are you just going to keep repeating your opinion in a troll-like manner?

 

I HATE to be with the other side on that point. But what arbery did came before the euthanasiation. What Travis supposedly said came after. But that reason aside, of course I think both you and I know for certain that both sides of the case should have been presented to the jury.

 

I have to correct you about something. It wasn't actually work boots, it was high-rise sneakers, and it probably may have looked like the shape of a work boot on one of his feet because he may have been wearing an ankle monitor, since he was on probation at the time. (A fact which might have not emerged because they did not want to prejudice people against Arbery)
High-rise sneakers are not normal to be jogging in, but they are a very popular fashion item among young black men like Arbery.

That is what I see in the video, anyway. I could be wrong and it is hard to tell since the video is such low definition and blurry.

 

I see, now you dictate what debate is allowed in a thread..

 

I'm positive that you can't shock me and find it a bit presumptuous for you to assume my willingness to hear "your truth."

So, spew as much hatred as you want. It doesn't impact me in any way. I know that you and your ilk exist but none of you bring anything more than self-righteous indignation and hate. Go for it. I've probably seen more truth in my life than you can even conceptualize (but that's not big with your kind so don't worry about that).