The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I'm surprised a thread hasn't been started on this.   The jury just got the case and is deliberating as we speak in the shooting death of jogger Ahmaud Arbery at the hands of Greg and Travis McMichael.   A third man, William Bryan is also facing the same charges for filming the incident.

Yeah, this one has kind of been under the radar because it started during the Rittenhouse trial. These three guys need to go away for what they did to Ahmaud Arbery.

I don't know of anyone who doesn't think they should be going away for this. Horrible story from the beginning.

In my opinion, it's a more egregious case than, but similar to the Rittenhouse trial, in terms of claims by the defendants.  They are claiming self defense because Arbery attacked them and tried to take their gun.

Is the video out there for the public to see? I've barely followed this, but if you're following a guy with a gun, it's hard to plead self defense.

I'm surprised that this story hasn't been at the very top of the news since it happened.  If ever there was a murder case that is a cut and dry absolute 100% example of racism, this is the one.  The jury shouldn't need much time to return a guilty verdict on this case.

I'm surprised too since they are doing everything they can to avoid reporting on the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, plenty of available air time.

Interestingly, the Ghislaine Maxwell thing has been all over the news in England.  That story gets as much coverage over the pond as the Gabby Petito murder got in the US.   Weird.

Just got a news break that the jury asked to see the cell phone video for a second time and within an hour after viewing it, they reached a verdict.

Travis McMichael- Guilty on all counts

Greg McMichael- Guilty on all counts except Malice Murder

William Brian- Guilty on three of four counts of felony murder and two counts of aggravated assault

From what I gathered, they chased him down and pointed the weapon at him. Then, Arbery tried to grab the gun and got shot in the process. Guilty on all counts is the right call if what I said is true. I don't know what Arbery was doing, some say jogging, others have said he was wearing Timberlands which means he absolutely was not jogging, but it doesn't matter either way. As a citizen you have to know the law and if you want to make a citizen's arrest, you better know what you are doing or you can die in prison.

Aside from Prince Andrew, I think her and Epstein have many more political connectiosn in the US than anywhere else, so that's probably why they aren't making a big deal out of it. They both went to parties non stop and have pictures with everyone, whether they really knew them or not, they were connected at the highest levels. I'm kinda surprised she didn't "commit suicide" yet.

Even if Arbery was up to no good (which is debatable), the laws change big time once the suspect is off property and on a public road, or even leaving the property.  

I know a guy who confronted a burglar in his house with a hammer (the burglar was unarmed).  The burglar took off and my friend went after him.  When they got outside the house, my friend threw the hammer at the burglar hoping to slow him down so he could forcefully recover his stolen property.   Unfortunately the hammer hit the burglar in the head so hard, he collapsed and hit his head again on the street.  He never regained consciousness and died two days later at the hospital.

My friend was charged with murder because the burglar was no longer in his home and fleeing the crime scene (not attacking him).   The State Attorney's office allowed him a plea deal to involuntary manslaughter and recommended a 3-5 year sentence because they were sympathetic to his situation.  He ended up doing 40 months.

I know, in NYC I basically have to let a burglar take what he wants from my house and hope he doesn't kill me. Every state has different laws and people should know them, but these guys appeared to be dumb. Not cold blooded killers, just dumb and they shouldn't have escalated it like they did. If you want to looking for criminals, you better have an army with you so the criminal or innocent man as Arbery appeared to be has no choice but to surrender and let the courts settle it.

Definitely don't just bring a camera to record the event. If the camera guy brought a gun instead, good chance Arbery would still be alive and these guys are either found innocent or only do a little time.

I think you're half right: without a camera, this is just another open-and-shut case of Self-Defense From A Dangerous Thug.  He was menacing them with a deadly weapon!

So yeah, their main problem is that they recorded it.

I think if it's 3 men vs. 1, with the 1 being dead and one of the 3 being armed, they would really need some hell of an alibi to avoid jail. That being said, recording the event and then giving it to the cops probably made every lawyer in America wince and then bill their client for wincing. Shows me they thought they did the right thing or at least didn't do anything illegal and that was obviously stupid.

I wondered how you would spin this to still find a way to talk about racism when an almost all white jury convicted three white men of murdering a black man.  You did not disappoint. 

You crack me up. I've never seen the video and came to the conclusion they are guilty. Their story doesn't add up regardless of the video. I promise if you just go out into the real world you will see that most people get along and aren't out to get others regardless of race, sex, political affiliation or even financial status.  

Why?  It's their word vs. his, and he's dead.

I keep saying that without video, there's no conviction and you guys act like that's crazy talk.  Tell me where I'm wrong.  The outcome of these kinds of events* is not surprising, nor is it hard to predict: whenever there is an event like this that involves black vs. white (or if inapplicable, then liberal vs. conservative), if there isn't hard video evidence exonerating the black/liberal party, the justice system is going to come down against them.

The one exception I can think of was Amber Guyger, and even in that very egregious and clear-cut case, there was a contingent on this forum trying their hardest to argue that she didn't actually commit murder.

*edit: To be ultra-clear here before every conservative on this board starts screaming about OJ SIMPSON!!!1!: I am talking about events where one person openly admits to killing another but claims it was justified.

I wasn't referring to your opinion of their guilt.
I was referring to the verdict.

To be extremely fair to myself: I was responding to the claim that if these gentlemen had brought fewer cameras and more guns, Arbery would be alive and they would not be headed to prison for murder.  And I think that claim is exactly half true.

The idea that if only there were three armed people to confront Arbery that day instead of two, this would have went down totally differently is so bizarre that I don't even know what to say to it.  Whatever the question, the answer always seems to be we need more guns!

Okay, that is fair.  But my comment to you was more pointed to the frequency with which you refer to racism in general rather than specifically the Arbery case.  I didn't make that very clear in my original response to you and that is my fault.   In the big picture (talking about society in general, not specific court cases), I fully agree with you that racism still exists and is very real.  Racism spans the spectrum of races.  There are white racists, black racists, Hispanic racists, Asian racists, etc etc etc.  And there is an unacceptable amount of it.  Ideally, there would be zero racists in the world.  But to try to label everything bad as racist (I'm not saying you do this), I think does a disservice to the effort of shining a flashlight in the dark corners where true racism exists.  It becomes a modern day McCarthyism (a commie or now a racist under every rock) and dilutes the fight against real racism.  Hell, I've been called racist.  A fact that my Jamaican godson finds hilarious now that he is an adult, but that is another story for another time.    I dunno, maybe I've just been smart (lucky) enough in choosing friends that I've just not been around many racists in my life (unless they hide it REALLY well) and fortunate enough to have been raised in a very multicultural part of South Florida and fortunate enough to have always been around others who looked different from me in sports, the military, etc. so that it just never even occurred to me that being different from me made anyone lesser than me.  I am forever grateful for that. 

As for the Arbery case, sadly, I think that poor guy would be dead regardless of the ratio of guns to cameras.  Thankfully, justice was served and the perpetrators were convicted as they very much should have been. 

It's not bizarre if you take a step back and think about it. The 3 men did not go right up to Arbery and shoot him. They confronted him, they chased him, but they did not do a drive by. They only fired back when he went for the gun, which was an absolutely reasonable response from Arbery since he was terrified these men would kill him. Because they did.

However, if all 3 men had a gun, very good chance Arbery doesn't try anything and waits for the cops to arrive since he knows he can't disarm all 3. Not saying he did anything wrong since there isn't evidence of that, odds are the 3 men would be in some legal trouble if they couldn't prove to the cops they saw him committing a crime but all 4 would be alive and 3 wouldn't be facing life sentences.

Now, if you think they were going to kill him no matter what, then that is a difference of opinion that probably can't be bridged.

Both the father and the son were armed when they confronted Arbery.  So what difference would a third gun make?

At best, it seems like you're saying that the father should have been more aggressive with his firearm, in the hopes of intimidating Arbery.  But I don't even subscribe to the idea that - in a hypothetical situation where it's 3-on-1 and only one of them is armed - the problem is an insufficiently overwhelming threat to coerce cooperation.

The "problem" was the camera, full stop.  Whether there were one, two, or three guns, the camera was always the problem for these self-important vigilantes.

The irony is, while some on this thread are happy to briskly file this away as the one-off actions of hardcore racists, I see it as just another day in America.  The sentiment behind this encounter is far too common, and was repeatedly expressed in the Rittenhouse thread: our woke government is too politically correct to Do Something about this crime wave, so armed patriots are taking this matter into their own hands.  Arbery's "mistake" was in trying to defend himself, instead of just complying like he is supposed to.  And these guys were so high on their own sovereign citizen supply that they thought releasing the video of this murder would exonerate THEM.

If there's no video taken, and Travis McMichael can show some scrapes and bruises from the scuffle, this case is virtually IDENTICAL to George Zimmerman's and has the same outcome.

I agree with Spider that without the video, that these guys are found not guilty, heck they would never stand trial.  Also, IMO, if Arbery was white he never gets chased down and shot like he did.

I'm not exactly sure what the extent of what William Bryan's role was, and the guilty verdict for felony murder.  Yes, I know he filmed the incident, and that he used his truck to try and stop Arbery; so he should be guilty of aggravated assault.  But he did not have a gun, and I don't think he started out with the McMichael's, or that he knew they were armed.  If he started out with the McMichaels then I think he should be guilty of felony murder, but I don't think that was the case.  If he were tried separately I don't think he would have been convicted of murder, but IMO he was guilty of assault.  I'm sure his lawyer will appeal the verdict, he was calling for a mistrial every day of the trial.

Also, there was a disgusting comment made by the attorney for the father during her closing remarks, she described Arbery that he had "no socks on to cover his long, dirty toenails".

Jesus.  Crap like that is why I like dogs better than people.   And that was a supposedly educated attorney that made that remark?

Wasn't this the same lawyer that asked the judge to ban any black clergy from the courtroom

I'm not sure if she did, but the attorney for Bryan kept going on and on about Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson being there, and wondering if other reverends were going to show up. That was one of his many reasons to request a mistrial.

Two different attorneys.