Ahmaud Arbery

Overheal

mynamejeff wrote: »

would number 6 and 7 not be considered ? going on some of the information being represented here

6 applies if you hire someone to kill someone else for you. Like a hit man.

7 applies when there is torture and such. Chasing him would not seem to qualify for this. This is for things like physical mutilation designed to increase victims torment and suffering, chopping off body parts, etc.

Overheal

mynamejeff wrote: »

the whole thread is a little light on facts ,but i ve already pointed that out to several posters

...

mynamejeff wrote: »

theres 750 posts , i was in work all day so wasn't reading this thread . what post number was it , do you know who created it ?

Which is it then?

Guy:Incognito

mynamejeff wrote: »

theres 750 posts , i was in work all day so wasn't reading this thread . what post number was it , do you know who created it ?

So, yeah, I assume i've to fill the last part in myself? - Youre going to keep running from the question

MeMen2_MoRi_

mynamejeff wrote: »

the whole thread is a little light on facts ,but i ve already pointed that out to several posters ,


did i make that comment about stupid games and prizes ?

Like I said, your best bet is to wait till trial then you can have at it with all the shiny facts at hand.

I didn't say you did? I thought it was a good reference if you're looking me to have sympathy that these guys may face the death penalty.

mynamejeff

Overheal wrote: »

6 applies if you hire someone to kill someone else for you. Like a hit man.

7 applies when there is torture and such. Chasing him would not seem to qualify for this. This is for things like physical mutilation designed to increase victims torment and suffering, chopping off body parts, etc.

6, The offender caused or directed another to commit murder or committed murder as an agent or employee of another person;

the father or the other person charged with murder for causing or directing the act perhaps, matter for the prosecution I suppose but given the public attitude it seems possible, same goes for number 7

Gatling

If there was a need for a roundabout in this thread how many roundabouts would we need

Overheal

mynamejeff wrote: »

6, The offender caused or directed another to commit murder or committed murder as an agent or employee of another person;

the father or the other person charged with murder for causing or directing the act perhaps, matter for the prosecution I suppose but given the public attitude it seems possible, same goes for number 7

It’s not.

MeMen2_MoRi_

Gatling wrote: »

If there was a need for a roundabout in this thread how many roundabouts would we need

Are we speaking factually, conspiracy or drawing conclusions from what we know?

Factually speaking I think alot, conspiracy I haven't a notion and from drawing conclusions from what we know again I think alot.

mynamejeff

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

Like I said, your best bet is to wait till trial then you can have at it with all the shiny facts at hand.

I didn't say you did? I thought it was a good reference if you're looking me to have sympathy that these guys may face the death penalty.

shouldn't every one wait for the facts to be known ?

sure it has nothing to do with me why did you post it at all ? you just don't seem to bothered if justice is done or not ,

mynamejeff

Overheal wrote: »

...





Which is it then?

what do you mean ?, im saying i haven't seen this video or know where it comes from

Guy:Incognito

Tasfasdf wrote: »

Ask ur ma

ah, look whos back. you going to leave your posts up this time or quickly delete them again?

mynamejeff

Overheal wrote: »

It’s not.

its not what ? a matter for the prosecution ? surely it is

Overheal

mynamejeff wrote: »

what do you mean ?, im saying i haven't seen this video or know where it comes from

You’re complaining about a lack of facts in the thread while simultaneously you admit not reading the thread.

Guy:Incognito

Here you go Jeff. Knock yourself out.

https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000007142853/ahmaud-arbery-video-911-georgia.html?smid=pl-share


Now, are we any close to an answer for this?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113570527&postcount=739

mynamejeff

Gatling wrote: »

If there was a need for a roundabout in this thread how many roundabouts would we need

did you find that post yet ? 612

MeMen2_MoRi_

mynamejeff wrote: »

shouldn't every one wait for the facts to be known ?

sure it has nothing to do with me why did you post it at all ? you just don't seem to bothered if justice is done or not ,

It may seem that way from your joining of the dots from our interaction, I'm very much in favour of justice being served.

JP Liz V1

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

A tank by tomorrow.


Unless youre not joking. No he wasnt armed with anything.

Gatling wrote: »

No he was completely unarmed .

Despite this several posters claim he had a hammer

I was genuinely asking so he wasn't?

mynamejeff

Overheal wrote: »

You’re complaining about a lack of facts in the thread while simultaneously you admit not reading the thread.

just that i hadn't seen this video, or know where it was from , see it now cheers

Overheal

mynamejeff wrote: »

its not what ? a matter for the prosecution ? surely it is

Neither is applicable.

Gregory McMichael/Travis McMichael weren’t hired hitmen of one another. Neither of them committed the murder for money.

None of the torture or other clauses of 7 apply either.

These criteria are narrowly applied. Only 76 people have been executed in Georgia in the last 37 years.

mynamejeff

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Here you go Jeff. Knock yourself out.

https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000007142853/ahmaud-arbery-video-911-georgia.html?smid=pl-share


Now, are we any close to an answer for this?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113570527&postcount=739

aw there we go , thanks , so when did the NYTs start investigating and prosecuting murders , will that video be used in the trial ? hardly


ya still haven't seen the rest of the video prior to the shooting, but neither have you or any one here , is that the answer you were looking for ?

Beasty

mynamejeff wrote: »

how come you keep answering for gatling ?

having actual provable facts like Im suggesting is what prevents conspiracy theorys don't you realise that ?

why don't you want me in the thread pointing out where facts are missing ? that's kinda weird ..

Threadbanned for ignoring the warning I posted shortly before this post

Guy:Incognito

Suppose he gets his out now, ah well.
He did manage one more deflection too.

Gatling

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

I was genuinely asking so he wasn't?

There was claims a hammer was seen on video in the road during the chase no weapon or hammer was recovered by police at the scene ,
The same people claimed he was wearing heavy boots ,but the CCTV from the property he walked through clearly showed him wearing trainers at the time

ShatterAlan

Danzy wrote: »

Maybe Arbery was a Dylan Klebold wannabe.

We know he was extremely volatile and very aggressive.

No "WE" don't.


I don't know that he was volatile and/or aggressive. Do you?


For whom are you speaking?

ShatterAlan

Donald Trump wrote: »

You might want to educate yourself before you start wandering about with a hammer in your pocket for no reason.


Here is an example article about Gardai seizing hammers, among other items, from people
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/blade-bare-weapons-cache-seized-from-teen-gang-highlighting-reality-of-knife-crime-925892.html

If I am walking down the street with a bottle of acid drain cleaner for no reason, that is also a weapon and I could be charged for it

Really?


Is it illegal to carry a hammer or a bottle opener or a shoelace? You said it was illegal to carry a knife. I said fine....it's not illegal to carry a glass bottle of wine or a pencil or a set of car keys.....all of which can be used to kill a man. ??

Kidchameleon

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

they claim they were making a citizens arrest. in order to make a citizens arrest you have to see the person committing the offence.

Overheal wrote: »

They had to immediate knowledge of any misdemeanor or felony. They had no reasonable suspicion either.

Not true.

https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-17/chapter-4/article-4/17-4-60/

"In Georgia, the law states that a private person may arrest someone if a crime is committed in his presence or “within his immediate knowledge.” But if it is a felony, the citizen can stop someone from escaping if the citizen has “reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.”

https://www.georgiacriminallawyer.com/theft-by-taking

"The penalty for theft by taking can either be a misdemeanor or felony in Georgia. When the theft involves property valued at $500 or less, then the crime will be deemed a misdemeanor in Georgia. The consequences of a misdemeanor include a fine of no more than $1,000 and a jail sentence of no more than 12 months."

Unfortunately for the people supporting Arbery, all of the boxes are ticked in favor of the McMichaels. I hope they get a fair trial.

Kidchameleon

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

a couple of people posting opinions you dont like does not constitute a mob.

I consider the people in support of Arbery, the ones who are threatening Mr Larry English in this case, to be a mob.

osarusan wrote: »

But the records suggest that there was just one reported burglary in the area that month - the theft of a gun from Travis McMichael's truck.

Just on this. It is not uncommon for crimes to go unreported. From personal experience of the Guards not giving a sh1t, it would take a serious problem for me to feel the need to contact them. Also, things can get robbed and the owner not notice for a time. What we do know is that certain residents of that neighborhood were in contact with the police regarding break ins and property was going missing.

Gatling wrote: »

That's because it hasn't gone to trial yet .

Three were charged with murder this is a fact

Innocent unless found guilty.

blinding wrote: »

It was very poor boxing in when Arbery could run either side of the Vehicle and 180 degrees either way as well ! !

Not to mention that he could have just stopped rather than trying to leg it.

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Can he out run a speeding bullet?

They had loads of time to shoot him if they had wanted to. The shot went off after Arbery tried to wrestle the gun off McMichaels.

Kidchameleon

Overheal wrote: »

So it’s not self defense to chase down a Black for a gun you think he stole weeks ago.

They didn't chase him down (see the video) and they didn't try to arrest him for stealing a gun. They tried to arrest him because he was seen trespassing. He was seen by a neighbor (again see the video) who told the McMichaels. Arbery would have run right past their house after he sprinted upon seeing the neighbor calling the police. It is quite possible the McMichaels saw him sprinting.

Overheal wrote: »

And CCPD isn’t in the practice of covering it up.

Have they tried to cover up this case? Please share your evidence. My understanding is that they were perfectly entitled to attempt citizens arrest, it was an obvious case of self defense the moment Arbery tried to take the shotgun & the authorities saw no reason to arrest them (especially since the video proves their innocence). I believe they were arrested to appease the mob the gained traction over the course of the 70 days since Arbery's death.

Overheal wrote: »

They did this because they jumped out of their vehicle to engage Arbery for crimes they suspected him of weeks prior.

No they didn't. There is a video of the incident (linked in the OP) and they clearly did not jump out of their vehicle.


Saying they "jumped" out of their vehicle is obviously an attempt sensationalize things. I cant understand why people do this when there is video openly available that refutes it. Its just so cowardly. Stick to the facts.

Overheal wrote: »

4 minutes of chase makes it clear that Arbery was chased down by them and forced into a fight. They aimed their shotgun at him.

Where is your evidence they "chased" him for 4 minutes? Because in the video they are clearly waiting for him at the end of the road & Arbery has multiple alternate paths he can take other than approaching them. Please provide proof that they aimed their shotgun at him.

Overheal wrote: »

He did.

No he didn't. He ran to the front of the vehicle, where Travis was, and tried to take the shotgun off him. See the video linked in the OP.

Kidchameleon

Image from the Satilla Shores Neighborhood watch Facebook page. IMHO, give extra weight to the McMichaels having reasonable suspicion.

Kidchameleon

Overheal wrote: »

Wrong https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/equality/496722-i-just-need-to-know-what-hes-doing-wrong-two-911-calls-made

First line of that article says he was "jogging". HE WAS NOT JOGGING. Do you think he was jogging the other times he entered that property, after midnight? The rest of it I need to take with a pinch of salt. Would you have access to the actual audio described in this article? Because it looks very much like one of the ones I linked in the OP only with some key contextual details missing.


Here are other images of Arbery in that property at NIGHT TIME. Do you honestly believe he was jogging on all of these occasions? Simple logic suggests he was not. Note also the boat in one of the images, was there once fishing gear stored in it? I cannot confirm the time's in these stills because the original footage to my knowledge was not time stamped but I wanted to simply show he was there at night time.





It is definitely him in the images. It has been confirmed by his family and his tattoos are clearly visible in the videos. What a charming young man.