The three men who chased Ahmaud Arbery have been sentenced to life in prison. Arbery was killed after he ran at one of the men who had a gun and tried to take away the gun. This is a very outrageous and unjust ruling, in my opinion and the opinions of many others. Not only was the man who actually shot Arbery sentenced to life in prison, but the other two men who were with him were as well. The man who is least guilty was "only" sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. He had filmed the incident, and later give the video and testimony of what happened to police. This was later used as evidence against them, and likely a guilty verdict would not have even been possible without it. There is probably a huge amount of bias here against these men, due to the current push in society being created by the news media about outrage over racist killings of black men, in situations involving police or people who are carrying out the type of actions that police do. The bias is not only one of an outrage and trying to seek vengeance against racism, but also probably a bias against the use of physical force, and especially the use of guns, to deal with situations, when those people are trying to protect themselves and property, or stop crimes. This is a very short summary of the story: Gregory McMichael and his son Travis got into a pickup truck with guns to follow a young black man they saw running through their neighborhood whom they suspected may have burglarized houses and been responsible for break-ins in the neighborhood. Arbery was not willing to stop and talk to the men, so they continued to follow him in their truck, and Arbery ran at a faster pace to try to get away from them. The chase went past another neighbor's house, William Bryan, who saw the MicMichael's truck chasing the young black man. William Bryan then quickly went into his pickup truck to chase the suspect. At some point into the chase, the McMichael's truck stopped on the road, as Arbery was running towards it, away from the other truck that was chasing him. Gregory McMichael was at that point in the back bed of the pickup truck holding a gun. Arbery was running towards the direction of Travis McMichael, who had just stepped out of the front left driver's side door and was holding a shotgun, but Arbery changed direction and ran along the right side of the truck towards the front of the truck, at the same time Travis McMichael turned and moved towards the front left corner of the truck, facing towards the direction of Arbery. The camera does not get a good view at this point, but it appears Arbery ran at Travis McMichael. A shot can be heard (which hit Arbery), and then Travis can be seen stepping backwards while struggling with Arbery who has his hands on the shotgun, and then Arbery punches Travis. A personal commentary and assessment of the situation: Due to the situation and the position of the truck in the street, it is understandable why the McMichaels and Arbery did what they did in this situation. An exact timeline: A neighbor had called police after they saw Arbery entering a home that was under construction. Police records show the first call came in at 1:08 pm. Around 1:10, video shows the McMichael's truck following Arbery. Around 1:15 pm, a call was made to police from Travis McMichael's cell phone. This call lasted only 21 seconds before shots could be heard. Like most controversial cases and situations that involve injustice, the story involves many detailed complications. I do not wish to focus on this story to much because plenty of debate about that has already taken place in other threads in this forum, and it will distract from the focus of other parts of this subject, which I would like to focus on in this thread. Some argue that this was entirely a case of self defense, that none of them did anything that should be illegal. Others argue that the three may have made some mistakes that deserve punishment but that they should not be held responsible for the death. Others argue that they may be partially responsible for the death, but due to the circumstances of the situation the punishment should be far less than in the case of normal murder. Others argue that they are entirely responsible for the death, and that it was a murder. My view is that Gregory McMichael had reason to be suspicious of Arbery, but it was only adequate enough suspicion to try to follow him until police could arrive. Arbery probably did not want to wait around for police to arrive and that is why he was running trying to get away. Travis McMichael only took part in the chase because of Gregory McMichael. There was not really adequate time in that situation to communicate why Gregory McMichael was chasing the suspect. Neither was there adequate time to immediately call police. Travis and Bryan both did not know if police had already been called, and they were both focusing on driving the trucks, trying to pursue the suspect. Gregory McMichael was a retired former police officer. The fact that the three were not arrested by authorities until over 2 months after the incident indicates that this was not initially seen by police as an obvious murder. In my opinion, the findings of the jury and the sentence of the judge were mob justice. I know many people in society and members on this forum view the three as guilty of murder and want to see them severely punished with a passionate vengeance, but when there are court decisions like this, it is going to make people stop trusting the justice system. And when that happens, and a situation unfolds like this, otherwise normally law-abiding people are not going to go to police if someone dies. They might even decide it is better to hide the evidence. Even when their actions are entirely legal according to the law, there may be many situations where people do not trust taking the matter to authorities, even rational and logical people. This is not going to be a good thing.
There was a thorough investigation, a fair trial where they had excellent representation and they were found guilty. What they did was patently illegal and criminal from beginning to end. Case closed!
An interesting thread. And I agree with you. You may also find my thread interesting on this subject. It is called "A miscarriage of justice."
You think life in prison in the fair and appropriate punishment, for all three of them? Keep in mind they could have just as easily lied about having a fully valid legal reason to have chased and stopped Arbery, and then they could not have been found guilty. But they didn't lie. And you don't think what these three men did was understandable, given the situation? What makes you think they were "violent"? I hope you are not intentionally making a disingenuous statement trying to deceive us. Do you think chasing someone while carrying guns for your own protection is "violence"?? Keep in mind Travis claims to have seen someone who looked like Arbery before in the construction site, but Travis did not approach because he was unarmed and he says the suspect reached for their waist as if they might have a gun. Gregory called this incident in to the police, 11 days before the chase and shooting incident.
I agree that the investigation was thorough, accurate (with possibly one small exception) and that there were no procedures in the trial that were unfair. But even with that being the case, the outcome was unfair. I would argue that the prosecutor was able to convince the jury that the defendants broke laws that they did not actually break, and applied laws to a situation in ways those laws were never specifically meant or intended to apply in. The jury was probably biased. And the judge failed to scrutinize the logic of the charges or the logic of the case, and imposed a sentence that was blatantly unfair, although legally fitting for the type of charges they were convicted of.
They committed assault, both with vehicles and firearms. And then one of them murderer him. Yes, that is violent. The violent criminals are facing justice for this murder.
Sorry, I'm going to refuse to engage in an argument with you because you are using vague loaded words in an intentionally disingenuous way. (Or in a way that seems to me to be obviously intentional) You have already done this in three other threads debating this topic with me. I will not be wasting my time arguing with someone who uses such debate tactics again. I could stoop to the same low level and just say "Arbery was a criminal thug who decided to assault Travis and steal his gun, in order to then be able to kill the other older man", but I won't.
Raw video: Ahmaud Arbery shooting in Georgia | WSB-TV, WSB-TV, May 12, 2020 Arbery kept changing directions so frequently that Travis didn't really know where he was going. Let's go over this. Supposedly (we can't be entirely sure if this is true), Travis was chasing Arbery in the forward direction with his truck. Then Arbery suddenly turned around and ran backwards and Travis stopped the truck in the road and at that point got out. After this is where the video begins. Arbery runs back towards the direction of the truck Travis is standing next to. First it appears Arbery is going to go left, but then he sees Travis is there and swerves as if he is going to go to the right. In response to that, Travis slowly starts backing away moving to the left. But then Travis, maybe seeing an opening beginning to form, swerves back as if he's going to go to left. As Arbery rapidly gets closer, this change suddenly catches Travis off guard, since he was facing towards the left slowly walking away, and he suddenly stops to keep an eye on Arbery and see what he's doing. (Travis is only stopped for a few moments, and it is at this point that Travis aims his gun towards Arbery to try to keep him away, since it seems to him like Arbery may be running towards him) Arbery, seeing that Travis is now not continuing to move left and out of the way, then finally swerves to the right, and goes right around the truck. Travis then moves back towards his vehicle to position himself near the front right corner of the truck, to get closer to his truck and keep a line of sight on Arbery (otherwise the line of sight would be blocked by the vehicle). Watching the video, I am not sure that it does appear Travis ever attempted to "intercept" Arbery. (after he got out of the truck) He just did not know which direction Arbery was going to take because Arbery kept swerving in different directions and being unpredictable and erratic in which path he seemed to be headed. Travis thought Arbery was going to go to the right side of the truck, so was caught off guard as he was slowly walking away to the left and Arbery suddenly seemed to be running towards the right, quickly closing in towards him. It's only at that point that Travis pointed the gun at him and said "Stop!" Travis was caught by surprise a little bit and may not have had time to think. What he probably should have said is "Stay away from me!" But that would have taken more words and Travis may have felt he did not have much time, since this was happening very fast. It almost seems like Arbery was intentionally trying to make Travis think Arbery was going in different directions to confuse Travis so Travis would not know which path Arbery was actually going to take. Like in basketball. At the very earliest (just after 0:13) 0:14 mark in that video, you can clearly see what looks like Arbery running towards the direction of Travis. It's possible maybe Arbery thought he would be able to attack Travis at this point and that's when Arbery suddenly positioned is gun and pointed it at Travis. It's hard to see what position the gun was in because Travis is so far away and blurry at this point in the video and just looks like a dark figure. Now discussing when they met in front of the truck, because some may try to claim that "Travis tried to intercept Arbery" and may be the reason why he tried to attack him. It is possible Arbery might have misinterpreted Travis's movement. It seems the two moved towards each other a little bit at a path that would have intercepted at a right angle, although on the video it really did not look like Travis was going to move all the way forward on a path of interception. The position of the truck seems to have been slightly slanted with the front towards the right, which did not help in this situation. (Had the truck been oriented completely straight forward, Travis would not have been so close to the path of Arbery who was trying to move towards the center of the road as he emerged from going past the front right side of the truck)
You are going to refuse to engage because you can't defend you argument. The terms I used have LEGAL definitions. The difference is that I can defend my claims, and you can't. As we have seen over and over at least three times, by your count, now. I agree that it would be a waste of time for you to continue trying to argue things that you can't defend. I'm willing to appeal to the law and logic for my claims. You act offended by either and engage in neither in your "defenses." You've also continually misrepresented the facts of the case, as I've shown several times. I'm sorry if you believe that it is "stooping" to actually consider legal facts. I appreciate you admitting that you can't have this conversation. If you find yourself able to, I'll still be here. Meanwhile (and I know you can never come to terms with this fact): It isn't okay for a person committing a crime to threaten to kill a person who isn't. But keep making up bullshit if you can't talk about the facts.
Then please clarify that whenever you use those words. Otherwise using those words could convey a dishonest message. For example, maybe you could say something like: "What Travis did constituted "assault" under the legal definition of the law because..." Rather than just saying Travis committed assault, because we know he didn't obviously do that.
Really? Here's just another example of what you do. You claim things that are not obviously true, as if they were facts everyone could agree on. "committing a crime" is not something Travis obviously did. You also used "threatening to kill" in a vague sort of sense. I guess you mean you think Travis had no right to threaten the suspect with his gun if the suspect came too close and was trying to run towards him? or are you referring to a "threatening to kill" before then, during the chase? In which case I would say that is not something Travis obviously did.
Are you capable of explaining why you believe what they did constituted "assault", without using legal terminology and without resorting to the use of vague words and generalities? Isn't it true that Travis only pointed the gun towards Arbery when Arbery was running towards Travis, and Travis thought Arbery might run directly at him? It's true Travis might not have had the complete right to do that, if he was already committing a crime. But how can that be the crime that makes doing that same thing a crime? That's circular logic. So I guess you are going to have to try to claim Travis committed an "assault" with his vehicle then, huh? I hope we can presume you don't mean that following the suspect was an assault.
