Arbery Case Outcome

[American123]

If that data is relevant to the case, then it should come out/exist in that trial, not a separate one. The court system does not exist to create data sets and analytical talking points; this isn't Moneyball.

The purpose is to administer Justice.
That has already been done, so why double jeopardize these people and try them on their intent and feelings behind the actual crime?

Notice how the guy who purposely drove through a Christmas parade, killing multiple people, comparatively, got buried in the media. This Arberry case is front and center. There's no agenda by the media and no obvious bias on when these subjective laws are pursued…

 

[SonicBlue03]

Watched the Rekieta Law channel when sentencing was done. Outside of the judge providing his own opine (which they're all entitled to do, I guess) the sentences seemed expected. I can't say I have a lot of sympathy for them. They had plenty of outs and made poor choices all the way around.

Prison time is gonna be rough for them. Fresh fish.

 

[bbbass]

I see a lot of people not understanding how the law works or being dense as to why a hate crime trial on a federal level is needed. A lot of complaining about hate crime laws with very little practical understanding of them.

Only YOU have the expertise to understand such things.

Thank you for your guidance on how we should or shouldn't express our opinions!!!

 

[bbbass]

I don't give advice on something I don't have all the pertinent facts on. Show me all the facts and I'd be happy to oblige.

You were asked for an OPINION, not ADVICE.

That you have the two confused reveals a lot about you.

 

[bbbass]

@Hueco gave the best response. So I'll refer you to his previously in the thread. My answer would be exactly the same.

Deflection from an opinionated person that cannot make his own defense of his opinions.

 

[bbbass]

I should follow my own advice:

 

[Dusty80]

I live 20 minutes from Brunswick where this happened. I had actually duck hunted with Travis McMichael through mutual friends. Here's my take on what happened, just my opinion. I've watched the video of the shooting several times. It don't lie. Firstly, they absolutely did not run down some innocent kid jogging in their neighborhood and kill him. TM surely thought that he would exit the truck with the gun, AA would see it and surrender until the police showed it. But AA ran directly at TM and grabbed the gun. TM never shouldered the gun. If I remember correctly all three shots were fired with AA holding the barrel end of the gun. Bad deal all the way around. Like an old man told me years ago...never pull a gun unless you're prepared to use it. AA was not the well dressed kid in his yearbook picture the media uses. That picture was 10 years old. He was a thug and had a long rap sheet and was scoping out the house.

 

[clanhanson]

I live 20 minutes from Brunswick where this happened. I had actually duck hunted with Travis McMichael through mutual friends. Here's my take on what happened, just my opinion. I've watched the video of the shooting several times. It don't lie. Firstly, they absolutely did not run down some innocent kid jogging in their neighborhood and kill him. TM surely thought that he would exit the truck with the gun, AA would see it and surrender until the police showed it. But AA ran directly at TM and grabbed the gun. TM never shouldered the gun. If I remember correctly all three shots were fired with AA holding the barrel end of the gun. Bad deal all the way around. Like an old man told me years ago...never pull a gun unless you're prepared to use it. AA was not the well dressed kid in his yearbook picture the media uses. That picture was 10 years old. He was a thug and had a long rap sheet and was scoping out the house.

There is no evidence he was scoping out the house, and the good old boys were obviously lying in wait. He grabbed the barrel because he likely felt it was his only choice. I wouldn't have gotten in their pickup either, once you're in an assailant's vehicle you're probably dead. I'm sorry about your duck hunting partner.

 

[Dusty80]

There is no evidence he was scoping out the house, and the good old boys were obviously lying in wait. He grabbed the barrel because he likely felt it was his only choice. I wouldn't have gotten in their pickup either, once you're in an assailant's vehicle you're probably dead. I'm sorry about your duck hunting partner.

There you go jumping to conclusions. "Duck hunting partner" is not at all true. We had hunted in the same group several years before. I probably could not have picked him out of a line up.

 

[wired]

Race was at the heart of this prosecution; if had been white, this case would never have gone to trial.

If Ahmaud Arbery had been white he never would have been shot.

 

[RVTECH]

He grabbed the barrel because he likely felt it was his only choice.

I agree and have said so before but I always find it interesting (not only in this situation but others I have read) where so many try to justify the shooting of an unarmed person as 'self defense' by saying 'he was trying to arm himself' (or something equally unrealistic or 'tacticoolish' sounding)

Arbery was simply trying to save himself by keeping the barrel away from his body. If Travis McMichael had NOT gotten within gun reaching distance to Arbery (which is always a wrong thing to do) Arbery would have never grabbed it.

Travis McMichael is obviously not too bright and was most likely playing out some bizzare fantasy precipitated by movies or other influences.

 

[mhayd93]

If Ahmaud Arbery had been white he never would have been shot.

Was this determined in the trial? I must've missed this fact!

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

If Ahmaud Arbery had been white he never would have been shot.

He would not have been shot if he hadn't tried to take the shotgun away.

 

[Koda]

Was this determined in the trial? I must've missed this fact!

Yes. McMichael told the police they had him cornered like a rat.

 

[Koda]

I agree and have said so before but I always find it interesting (not only in this situation but others I have read) where so many try to justify the shooting of an unarmed person as 'self defense' by saying 'he was trying to arm himself' (or something equally unrealistic or 'tacticoolish' sounding)

My understanding is that argument only works when the unarmed person started the fight, but in this case the McMichaels started the fight, heck they drove after him armed and then cornered him.

 

[SonicBlue03]

It's all moot since they're in prison and will die there.

Set race aside, if any of you find yourselves jogging/running and a group of people decided you were up to shenanigans near their property and decide to forcibly detain you with weapons and they're not police, then it's a natural conclusion to draw that you support people feeling like your possession of firearms might be a threat and you should be okay with the government taking them away from you.

If you think all citizens should get the benefit of the doubt and freedom, you should find yourselves okay with the verdict based on how the court case played out.

 

[mhayd93]

Yes. McMichael told the police they had him cornered like a rat.

This is the quote I was referring to: "If Ahmaud Arbery had been white he never would have been shot."

I don't think that "fact" ever came out in the trial, unless I missed a part where they testified that they only shot Arbery because he was black, but otherwise would have spared him if he was white.

 

[wired]

This is the quote I was referring to: "If Ahmaud Arbery had been white he never would have been shot."

I don't think that "fact" ever came out in the trial, unless I missed a part where they testified that they only shot Arbery because he was black, but otherwise would have spared him if he was white.

They don't have to testify to that. They chased him down because he was black and they thought he was a thief. You'll have proof from the federal civil rights conviction soon to come.

 

[Koda]

This is the quote I was referring to: "If Ahmaud Arbery had been white he never would have been shot."

I don't think that "fact" ever came out in the trial, unless I missed a part where they testified that they only shot Arbery because he was black, but otherwise would have spared him if he was white.

My bad, i misread.
So in the trial it was shown there were other trespassers some were white. They never went after them but singled out Aubury. They never had any evidence Aubury stole anything. They used racial epitaphs in their police report.... That alone kinda says it all.

 

[mhayd93]

They don't have to testify to that. They chased him down because he was black and they thought he was a thief. You'll have proof from the federal civil rights conviction soon to come.

"…and they thought he was a thief." That probably is the more accurate reason they chased him down. I have yet to see concrete evidence of your initial statement. I am not saying they were justified, I just get tired of everyone being so eager to racially sensationalize everything.