Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Ahmaud Arbery verdict: Guilty


The Silver Shroud
 Share

Recommended Posts

Three white men have been found guilty of murdering Ahmaud Arbery, a black jogger making his way through a suburban neighbourhood in Georgia last February.

The three men chased him in their trucks before shooting and killing him. The shooting, along with the police killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, helped inspire 2020’s mass racial injustice protests.

Ahmaud Arbery verdict: Three white men found guilty over murder of Black jogger in Georgia | The Independent

Edited by The Silver Shroud
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two words: Hate Crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watched some of that trial too. From what I saw they were guilty. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (IP: Staff) ·

It seems to be the right decision. I'm not so sure it is a "hate crime", but it was definitely not self defense! 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to this report he was nicknamed "the Jogger" because he used to steal from stores and do a runner:

Ahmaud Arbery jury did not hear five key arguments | Daily Mail Online

But this report has a different spin:

Black people face danger for doing ordinary things

Arbery’s killing highlighted the dangers Black Americans can face doing entirely ordinary things that white people may perceive as a threat. They range from bird watching to showing a house for sale to swimming.

Arbery, a former high school football standout, loved to run. On 23 February last year, he was jogging through his neighborhood in Brunswick, Georgia, when he was tracked by the McMichaels and Bryan and gunned down.

Relying on a civil war-era law that deputized citizens to police the movements of Black bodies and carry out citizen’s arrests of suspected criminals – a measure the state has since overhauled – the white men argued that they were acting in self-defense. They said they believed they were legally justified in pursuing Arbery because they thought he matched the description of a burglary suspect.

How the murder of Ahmaud Arbery further exposes America’s broken and racist legal system | Ahmaud Arbery | The Guardian

Edited by The Silver Shroud
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

It seems to be the right decision. I'm not so sure it is a "hate crime", but it was definitely not self defense! 

Thank you again for your honesty, I really respect that!!:tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Silver Shroud said:

Three white men have been found guilty of murdering Ahmaud Arbery, a black jogger making his way through a suburban neighbourhood in Georgia last February.

The three men chased him in their trucks before shooting and killing him. The shooting, along with the police killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, helped inspire 2020’s mass racial injustice protests.

Ahmaud Arbery verdict: Three white men found guilty over murder of Black jogger in Georgia | The Independent

Its an accurate and a totally correct verdict, maybe it will send a message down South to the good old boys who still think the Souths Gonna Do It Again!!:tu:

Now they had better be thinking about how the Fellows in the Grey Bar Hotel are going to welcome them, while I am not certain if it was a hate crime or not they will not be able to convince many of their fellow prisoners that it wasn't, so now that they are disarmed they had better be able to stand up like men!!:yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I disagree with the jury here. I don’t think he would have been killed if he didn’t try to disarm the guy. I don’t think they intended to kill him at all. I think they just wanted to stop a guy who had been seen trespassing on a property where things had been stolen the past few weeks. 
 

At the same time, obviously these men’s decision to chase down the guy armed with a shot gun was a dumb thing to do. If they left it at home, the three of them could have probably held him down till the cops got there, and everyone would be alive. 
 

This is a tough one. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

I think I disagree with the jury here. I don’t think he would have been killed if he didn’t try to disarm the guy. I don’t think they intended to kill him at all. I think they just wanted to stop a guy who had been seen trespassing on a property where things had been stolen the past few weeks. 
 

At the same time, obviously these men’s decision to chase down the guy armed with a shot gun was a dumb thing to do. If they left it at home, the three of them could have probably held him down till the cops got there, and everyone would be alive. 
 

This is a tough one. 

What is tough?

Three armed man chasing an unarmed jogger. They cut him off, stoped him, pointed his guns towards him. In desperation the jogger tries to defend himself from the atrackers and got killed. So what's tough?

 

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I think I disagree with the jury here. I don’t think he would have been killed if he didn’t try to disarm the guy. I don’t think they intended to kill him at all. I think they just wanted to stop a guy who had been seen trespassing on a property where things had been stolen the past few weeks. 
 

At the same time, obviously these men’s decision to chase down the guy armed with a shot gun was a dumb thing to do. If they left it at home, the three of them could have probably held him down till the cops got there, and everyone would be alive. 
 

This is a tough one. 

I liked your post because I also don’t think murder was the intention and because if he had not wrestled for the gun he would not have been shot. However he was not trespassing on their land nor had the owner asked them to watch the property so they had no standing to press charges. If they had held him down or otherwise against his will then the only people guilty of a crime still would have been them. The whole thing is a damn shame and the way the law is written they are guilty so this case achieved justice. Too bad that no amount of justice will ever fix the many lives ruined by their hasty and thoughtless actions.

Edited by OverSword
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I think I disagree with the jury here. I don’t think he would have been killed if he didn’t try to disarm the guy. I don’t think they intended to kill him at all. I think they just wanted to stop a guy who had been seen trespassing on a property where things had been stolen the past few weeks. 
 

At the same time, obviously these men’s decision to chase down the guy armed with a shot gun was a dumb thing to do. If they left it at home, the three of them could have probably held him down till the cops got there, and everyone would be alive. 
 

This is a tough one. 

It is very tough arguing it is self defence on the part of the three armed men. They would have more luck saying they had forgot themselves and had decided to lynch him. Amnesia could have been their defence.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, The Silver Shroud said:

It is very tough arguing it is self defence on the part of the three armed men. They would have more luck saying they had forgot themselves and had decided to lynch him. Amnesia could have been their defence.

Well thank God now they have no defense!:tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (IP: Staff) ·

The way this has become racialised is a bit disgusting, in my opinion. What evidence was presented anywhere (specifically at trial, because that is where the facts were decided, but at this stage I'll take anything as evidence) that the McMichael's did this because of the colour of Arbery's skin? 

* When George Floyd was murdered, Chauvin was labelled a racist by the media, but no one ever submitted any evidence that this was true, they just assumed he was! 
* When Kyle Rittenhouse shot 3 white people in self defense, it was presented in the media as a white supremacist killing minorities. 
* When Darrell Brooks drove his car into a parade full of people and killed 6 white people at a Wisconsin Christmas Parade, some in the media actually said that people seeking a race-related motive in this story are themselves being racist! 

 

I am sick and tired of the media gaslighting us! 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I think I disagree with the jury here. I don’t think he would have been killed if he didn’t try to disarm the guy. I don’t think they intended to kill him at all. I think they just wanted to stop a guy who had been seen trespassing on a property where things had been stolen the past few weeks. 
 

At the same time, obviously these men’s decision to chase down the guy armed with a shot gun was a dumb thing to do. If they left it at home, the three of them could have probably held him down till the cops got there, and everyone would be alive. 
 

This is a tough one. 

Actually there is proof if he tried to take the weapon or not the entire event was obscured by the front of the Truck. But, I will say this if your afraid for your life because armed men are chasing you with a pick up truck and you try to run away like he did when he was running along side of the truck. Then as you reach the front of the truck someone you didn't see pops out pointing a Shot Gun at you at dam near point blank range you only have two choices try to out run a perceived shot gun blast, or do the only thing that may prevent your death and try to take the gun. 

You only have a split second to make a decision, and I believe he made the right decision under the circumstances I just outlined. I have thought about this long and hard and I am certain I would have done what he did, the fear that was effecting him after being chased made his actions very logical under the circumstances. Then when you take the rest of situation into account those 3 idiots had no right to try and make their so called citizens arrest in the first place. If they thought some illegal had occurred they should have maybe followed at a distance called the police and reported what they precieved was crime. 

But what's worst of all is father that was leading the charge to catch him was a law enforcement officer. He knew the legality of their actions and he also knew they were dead wrong from the beginning that's why he lied to Police when they arrived in scene. 

But justice has been served and now they will suffer the consequences for the rest of their miserable lives, and instead of being the Hunters they will be the Hunted now that is poetic justice if their ever was any in my opinion!:tu:

14 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

The way this has become racialised is a bit disgusting, in my opinion. What evidence was presented anywhere (specifically at trial, because that is where the facts were decided, but at this stage I'll take anything as evidence) that the McMichael's did this because of the colour of Arbery's skin? 

* When George Floyd was murdered, Chauvin was labelled a racist by the media, but no one ever submitted any evidence that this was true, they just assumed he was! 
* When Kyle Rittenhouse shot 3 white people in self defense, it was presented in the media as a white supremacist killing minorities. 
* When Darrell Brooks drove his car into a parade full of people and killed 6 white people at a Wisconsin Christmas Parade, some in the media actually said that people seeking a race-related motive in this story are themselves being racist! 

 

I am sick and tired of the media gaslighting us! 

I certainly agree that is a problem in far to many cases, however, in this case there is enough evidence that race did play a major factor. It's fair to say if the Ahmaud Arbery was white they may have confronted him, but the odds are very good they would have done so without weapons cocked locked and loaded, in fact i would say  if he was White they most likely would not have confronted him with any weapons Open carried at all.

Peace. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

The way this has become racialised is a bit disgusting, in my opinion. What evidence was presented anywhere (specifically at trial, because that is where the facts were decided, but at this stage I'll take anything as evidence) that the McMichael's did this because of the colour of Arbery's skin? 

* When George Floyd was murdered, Chauvin was labelled a racist by the media, but no one ever submitted any evidence that this was true, they just assumed he was! 
* When Kyle Rittenhouse shot 3 white people in self defense, it was presented in the media as a white supremacist killing minorities. 
* When Darrell Brooks drove his car into a parade full of people and killed 6 white people at a Wisconsin Christmas Parade, some in the media actually said that people seeking a race-related motive in this story are themselves being racist! 

 

I am sick and tired of the media gaslighting us! 

Anyone jogging or exercising is a suspect and it is fine for a citizen to arrest them on that basis.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got no problem with the verdict. It appears they purposeful murdered him. Racist or not, they're guilty of killing him wrongfully.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (IP: Staff) ·
3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

I certainly agree that is a problem in far to many cases, however, in this case there is enough evidence that race did play a major factor. It's fair to say if the Ahmaud Arbery was white they may have confronted him, but the odds are very good they would have done so without weapons cocked locked and loaded, in fact i would say  if he was White they most likely would not have confronted him with any weapons Open carried at all.

Peace. 

Admittedly I am not as familiar with the Arbery case as I was with the Rittenhouse trial, but I don't think there is enough evidence to say that race played ANY role, let alone was a "major factor". Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that race definitely played zero part in this situation. It's possible it did, maybe even probable. But how much? 1%, 0%, 0.1%?

Unless the McMichael's have been vigilantes their whole lives, and have enacted citizens arrests on white people without weapons and only chose to use a weapon when making a citizen's arrest for a black man, you cannot make any assertion about their motives!  

2 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Anyone jogging or exercising is a suspect and it is fine for a citizen to arrest them on that basis.

I didn't say that, Duck. This is not a dichotomy - as if EITHER it was definitely racism OR they were entirely justified to chase him down! That's the dichotomy the media wants you to think exists! But there is plenty of middle ground there. It could be that the McMichael's believed they were in the right to make a citizen's arrest but found that they were incorrect about the law (ignorance of the law is not defense against breaking the law) - this version of events doesn't involve "racism" at all. 

If you read back through the thread you'll see I have made a post in this thread already - specifically saying that I think they were guilty, but they weren't necessarily racists. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

removed

Edited by The Silver Shroud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

Admittedly I am not as familiar with the Arbery case as I was with the Rittenhouse trial, but I don't think there is enough evidence to say that race played ANY role, let alone was a "major factor". Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that race definitely played zero part in this situation. It's possible it did, maybe even probable. But how much? 1%, 0%, 0.1%?

Unless the McMichael's have been vigilantes their whole lives, and have enacted citizens arrests on white people without weapons and only chose to use a weapon when making a citizen's arrest for a black man, you cannot make any assertion about their motives!  

I didn't say that, Duck. This is not a dichotomy - as if EITHER it was definitely racism OR they were entirely justified to chase him down! That's the dichotomy the media wants you to think exists! But there is plenty of middle ground there. It could be that the McMichael's believed they were in the right to make a citizen's arrest but found that they were incorrect about the law (ignorance of the law is not defense against breaking the law) - this version of events doesn't involve "racism" at all. 

If you read back through the thread you'll see I have made a post in this thread already - specifically saying that I think they were guilty, but they weren't necessarily racists. 

That is a fair an honest assessment of the situation, it is a dam shame more people cant speak honestly. This forum has some serious division among members and when any subject broaches politics in anyway honesty and integrity so straight in the Crapper!! 

Thank You!:tu:

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.