Ahmaud Arbery; racist killing and attempted cover up.

[Reepicheep]

New developments...

Good news. I never understood why it took over two months and an independent investigation for the three men to be arrested and charged. My new question is why did it take over a year for this district attorney to be arrested and charged.

I hope the 2nd district attorney involved in this case, who recommended no charges be laid, is also being investigated.

[Mountain Man]

How so?

A lynching is deliberate and intended.

This was a case of citizen's arrest gone horribly wrong. There was no intent on killing Abrey but rather arrest him and turn him over to the police.

That's what the entire case hinges on, I think. It does not appear there was ever an intent to shoot Arbury as the gun was only discharged after Arbury grabbed the barrel of the gun and tried to wrestle it away from McMichaels. It could easily have been an accident.

[tabibito]

How so?

A lynching is deliberate and intended.

This was a case of citizen's arrest gone horribly wrong. There was no intent on killing Abrey but rather arrest him and turn him over to the police.

Reviewing the available information, it seems likely that it started out that way. The final ten minutes or so makes it seem unlikely that it stayed that way.

[rogue06]

That's what the entire case hinges on, I think. It does not appear there was ever an intent to shoot Arbury as the gun was only discharged after Arbury grabbed the barrel of the gun and tried to wrestle it away from McMichaels. It could easily have been an accident.

A lot of it rests on whether the McMichaels overstepped their bounds and if so by how much

[rogue06]

Reviewing the available information, it seems likely that it started out that way. The final ten minutes or so makes it seem unlikely that it stayed that way.

So you think it was a deliberate execution.

Based on...

[tabibito]

So you think it was a deliberate execution.

Based on...

Not "was" - but "could have been." Not necessarily "deliberate execution" - but "deliberate bodily harm." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzNxSGsluSg about the 5 minute mark. {I think they killed all the unacceptable words}. There doesn't seem much to support the claims of a "hate crime" though. The words were said, but only after the third shot.

However, on further checking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nKf0TW-L1M is a more detailed and more immediate presentation - much more favourable to the McMichaels' case.

So - my initial assessment has been overturned.

[Cow Poke]

Not "was" - but "could have been." Not necessarily "deliberate execution" - but "deliberate bodily harm." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzNxSGsluSg about the 5 minute mark. {I think they killed all the unacceptable words}. There doesn't seem much to support the claims of a "hate crime" though. The words were said, but only after the third shot.

However, on further checking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nKf0TW-L1M is a more detailed and more immediate presentation - much more favourable to the McMichaels' case.

So - my initial assessment has been overturned.

There are two words that will prevent this case from ever being properly adjudicated --- black man.

When you bring race into the picture, it's more about emotion than fact.

[Mountain Man]

A lot of it rests on whether the McMichaels overstepped their bounds and if so by how much

Well, yes, I suppose that's the first question, whether or not the McMichaels' actions leading up to Arbery's death were illegal in and of themselves since Georgia law treats any death that is committed during a felony as a murder regardless of a defendant's intent. I have actually not heard any arguments suggesting that their attempt to apprehend Arbery was illegal. Everybody seems to be focusing on the moment of Arbery's death, which I think makes for a fairly weak case since the weapon was only discharged as a result of the struggle which certainly makes the shooting appear to be an accident.

[tabibito]

Well, yes, I suppose that's the first question, whether or not the McMichaels' actions leading up to Arbery's death were illegal in and of themselves since Georgia law treats any death that is committed during a felony as a murder regardless of a defendant's intent. I have actually not heard any arguments suggesting that their attempt to apprehend Arbery was illegal. Everybody seems to be focusing on the moment of Arbery's death, which I think makes for a fairly weak case since the weapon was only discharged as a result of the struggle which certainly makes the shooting appear to be an accident.

Three times. That struggle lasted quite a time - and the first two shots didn't stop him despite the first one hitting him in the chest. It has to be asked
what made him charge at an armed man in the first instance.
and
if McMichael was intent on killing, why wasn't he loaded for bear?

Arbery got that first shot point blank, so what was the load? birdshot?

[Juvenal]

Check out this video of Arbery not stealing things!

[Mountain Man]

Three times. That struggle lasted quite a time - and the first two shots didn't stop him despite the first one hitting him in the chest. It has to be asked
what made him charge at an armed man in the first instance.
and
if McMichael was intent on killing, why wasn't he loaded for bear?

Arbery got that first shot point blank, so what was the load? birdshot?

It's been a while since I watched the video, but I'm pretty sure it was third shot that hit him. As I recall, the first shot was triggered when Arbery grabbed the barrel of the gun which sent the shot past him. The second shot we can't see as the two men are out of frame. The third shot was with the barrel pointed directly at his mid section at which point he immediately let go of the barrel and fell to the ground as the younger McMichael backed away.

[tabibito]

Mountain Man From the 5:27 mark

[rogue06]

Well, yes, I suppose that's the first question, whether or not the McMichaels' actions leading up to Arbery's death were illegal in and of themselves since Georgia law treats any death that is committed during a felony as a murder regardless of a defendant's intent. I have actually not heard any arguments suggesting that their attempt to apprehend Arbery was illegal. Everybody seems to be focusing on the moment of Arbery's death, which I think makes for a fairly weak case since the weapon was only discharged as a result of the struggle which certainly makes the shooting appear to be an accident.

The last point is one of the biggest bones of contention. Some of those who have seen the video claim that the first shot was fired before Arbery grabbed the gun, others say after (as they struggled for control of the shotgun), and still others say it is impossible to ascertain as the event was obstructed by the vehicles.

They can't all be right.

[rogue06]

Three times. That struggle lasted quite a time - and the first two shots didn't stop him despite the first one hitting him in the chest. It has to be asked
what made him charge at an armed man in the first instance.
and
if McMichael was intent on killing, why wasn't he loaded for bear?

Arbery got that first shot point blank, so what was the load? birdshot?

I don't think it is known which blast struck Arbery with any certainty.

[tabibito]

I don't think it is known which blast struck Arbery with any certainty.

Some of those who have seen the video claim that the first shot was fired before Arbery grabbed the gun others say after (as they struggled for control of the shotgun), and still others say it is impossible to ascertain as the event was obstructed by the vehicles.

Video doesn't show that part true enough - it does show that Arbery rushed McMichaels Coroner's report would show how many shots actually hit - but it doesn't seem likely that a New York times report would say he was hit three times if it was only once. (Or does NYT not follow standard MSM procedures.) According to the video, the first shot injured Arbery (chest and sternum).