AHMAUD ARBERY: Georgia vs Greg & Travis McMichael & William Bryan for murder *GUILTY*

Mother seeks justice after son shot while jogging in Brunswick, pair involved in killing not arrested

It’s been over two months since a young black man jogging in Brunswick, Ga., was gunned down by two white men...

www.jacksonville.com

Mother seeks justice after son shot while jogging in Brunswick, pair involved in killing not arrested

It’s been over two months since a young black man jogging in Brunswick, Ga., was gunned down by two white men who said they thought he was a possible burglar.

Ahmaud Arbery’s mother wants to know where is the justice.

“I just think about how they could allow these two men to kill my son and not be arrested, that’s what I can’t understand,” Wanda Cooper told news partner First Coast News.

A police report states about 1 p.m. Sunday, Feb. 23, Glynn County officers responded to Satilla and Holmes drives where shots were fired. They found Arbery, 25, dead on the scene.

Gregory McMichael, who worked several years for the Brunswick Police Department before serving as an investigator in the Brunswick District Attorney’s Office, told police there were several break-ins in the neighborhood. He said he saw Arbery running down Satilla Drive and asked his son Travis McMichael to help him confront him.

McMichael and his son got a shotgun and handgun because they “didn’t know if Arbery was armed or not.”

The father and son got into their truck and drove down Satilla toward Burford Drive. Gregory McMichael stated when they arrived at Holmes Drive, they saw Arbery running down Burford, according to the report.

Gregory McMichael told police they attempted to cut off Arbery and shouted “stop, stop, we want to talk to you.”

McMichael pulled up next to Arbery, and Travis McMichael got out of the truck with the shotgun. According to statements, that’s when the father said Arbery attacked his son and the two men started fighting over the shotgun. Travis McMichael fired a shot and then a second shot.

After video appears to show black jogger gunned down by 2 white men in coastal Georgia, family demands arrests

The fatal shooting of a black man — apparently recorded on video in February and posted online Tuesday by a local radio station host — will go to a grand jury in coastal Georg…

ktla.com

After video appears to show black jogger gunned down by 2 white men in coastal Georgia, family demands arrests

The fatal shooting of a black man — apparently recorded on video in February and posted online Tuesday by a local radio station host — will go to a grand jury in coastal Georgia, according to a district attorney.

Elements of the disturbing video are consistent with a description of the shooting given to police by one of those involved in the incident.

Ahmaud Arbery, 25, was jogging in a neighborhood outside Brunswick on February 23 when a former police officer and his son chased him down, authorities said. According to a Glynn County Police report, Gregory McMichael later told officers that he thought Arbery looked like a person suspected in a series of recent break-ins in the area.

After they chased down Arbery, McMichael told police, Arbery and McMichael’s son Travis struggled over his son’s shotgun. McMichael said two shots were fired before Arbery fell to the street, the report said.


S. Lee Merritt, an attorney for the Arbery family, said in a statement that the two men involved in the chase “must be taken into custody pending their indictment.”

Gov. Brian Kemp said the Georgia Bureau of Investigation has offered resources to Durden for his investigation. “Georgians deserve answers,” Kemp tweeted.

Kemp also retweeted the GBI’s post that Durden “formally requested the GBI to investigate the death of Ahmaud Arbery.”

 

[Howell]

Someone is in a vehicle being ATTACKED by a man of foot... hmmm ... they could just DRIVE AWAY.. seriously...

Seriously? Did you not watch the video? No one was attacked in a vehicle.

 

[kdg411]

Neither you nor anyone else has offered any reasonable explanation why a convicted thief would repeatedly trespass on a vacant construction site at night.

RSBM
Has Ahmaud Arbery been convicted by any court for being a "thief"?

 

[Howell]

And you know this how?

From the tapes released, Arbery was the only one seen on multiple occasions. I'll concede that it's possible there are other tapes we haven't been shown. But again, what was Arbery's intent entering that property repeatedly at night?

 

[Howell]

RSBM
Has Ahmaud Arbery been convicted by any court for being a "thief"?

Yes.

"Court records show that as a student in high school, Arbery was sentenced to five years probation as a first offender on charges of carrying a weapon on campus and several counts of obstructing a law enforcement officer.

He violated his probation when he was convicted in a shoplifting case in 2018."

Court docs say Ahmaud Arbery had previous connection with one of the men who shot him

A Georgia man who took footage of Ahmaud Arbery's death may be arrested just as it's been revealed that one of the shooters previously investigated Arbery

thegrio.com

 

[GrandmaBear]

You and others keep suggesting that because he didn't steal anything that day, or because he wasn't prepared to steal expensive items that day, that he was an innocent jogger who had no nefarious intent. My point is, the fact that he didn't steal anything at that moment is meaningless.

Neither you nor anyone else has offered any reasonable explanation why a convicted thief would repeatedly trespass on a vacant construction site at night. I used that analogy as a way to compare who we should consider victims/not victims. I was not comparing the gravity of their crimes, and surely you knew that. But this is interesting, now Arbery's just a "possible" trespasser? Are you going with the other poster's rationale of 'if you don't get caught, it's not illegal'? I don't consider such a project to be huge either, nor do I claim to be an expert, I was just outlining my experience on construction sites. And yes, anyone who has spent time on them knows very well that items of value are all too often left behind and poorly secured. So if somebody says 'no contractor/tradesman would do that', they simply don't know what they're talking about.

It is not meaningless, they need reason to do what they did. It makes very much a difference what he did that day or if they saw him stealing etc.

The construction site at night has absolutely nothing to do with what happened that day. If they had something from that night and knew who it was, and that he had done something that he could be arrested for, he would have been arrested and charged.

i have not joined anyone with "possible" trespasser, I did what I do to determine my opinions and I looked up the Georgia law on it and posted it, perhaps you missed it? There are a few criteria and much of it is the person has to have been asked to leave the property, etc. Apparently you did not read it. We have no evidence at all he encountered anyone ever (like the homeowner) who told him to get out or leave the property. Georgia LAW which apparently the GBI is following.

I have told you from the start that I am not fond of media and their hype and I have repeated it more than once but just recently you accused my of following media hype and that my opinions come from there. I have looked up the law on trespassing and citizen's arrests and interpretations by attorneys and more (none of which match his buddy Barnhill by the way) and have watched the actual video clips.

No one needs an explanation of why Arbery was there prior and no one needs to give one. A citizen's arrest is based on catching someone in a certain act for one and then what they can do also has very specific paramaters and criteria. Arbery is not on trial here and cannot defend himself. Regardless, clearly they had no evidence of anything or he would have been arrested prior.

Your last argument goes against yourself imo. If theft was so common with contractors, that is why they don't leave them. If you are so certain Arbery was up to no good and the homeowner had video too, all of his contractors would be told to leave no tools. Arbery had been in there before allegedly (I don't think they have proof of identity but even if they did) and nothing was stolen or reported by the homeowner and no arrests were made. LE couldn't arrest him and had no proof of anything and neither did these men. That is so obvious it is like the sun in my eyes, how can you miss it?

None of what you say matters to the case imo, a defense may try the same, who knows as they don't have much imo other than such things. You go from self defense to now what was he up to when he was in there prior? You can assume he was up to anything you like prior, it still did not give them the right to go after him with firearms that day, nor as far as I can see on any prior occasion either. Thank GOD the laws do not allow for that or we will have a child chased with firearms who just entered a neighbors' home next or an old man, or a home under construction. Would they do that? I kind of doubt it. However, that is an assumption on my part but then almost everything you state are assumptions of what he was up to, what he was doing. You are judging Arbery with no real basis and no former evidence the way it looks just as these men did. I am going to guess that clearly LE knew there was not enough to ever arrest him prior.

When you say I and others or the other poster, etc., I just want to make it clear they are all fully capable of answering for themselves and do not seem to share your views either, and my remarks here are my view and I speak for no one else. I have also said I often am alone in some opinions through the past few years on some of my thoughts but I don't force my beliefs on anyone.

Kudos to sticking it out when you are the only one it appears, here at least, that has this opinion.

Always with respect unless I sense a lack of respect and then I will give it back.

One last point is that I have said repeatedly I doubt Arbery was a choir boy so whether his intent was nothing or whether it was bad, none of that to me makes any difference here because it has nothing to do with the choice these men made, they had no basis, no proof and they went way overboard. At minimum.

Jmo. *Edited typos and to clarify.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Seriously? Did you not watch the video? No one was attacked in a vehicle.

Don't be clueless. She is reversing the situation. He was on foot. They were in a vehicle. It is not as if he jumped into their vehicle and attacked. THEY GOT OUT or WERE OUT with guns, and on top of it cornered him and chased him with a vehicle.

 

[Guess Who]

From the tapes released, Arbery was the only one seen on multiple occasions. I'll concede that it's possible there are other tapes we haven't been shown. But again, what was Arbery's intent entering that property repeatedly at night?

yet he was seen in the day this time and with aboslutely nothing on him nor the ability to, so make up your mind about the day vs night thing.

 

[Guess Who]

It is not meaningless, they need reason to do what they did. It makes very much a difference what he did that day or if they saw him stealing etc.

The construction site at night has absolutely nothing to do with what happened that day. If they had something from that night and knew who it was, and that he had done something that he could be arrested for, he would have been arrested and charged.

i have not joined anyone with "possible" trespasser, I did what I do to determine my opinions and I looked up the Georgia law on it and posted it, perhaps you missed it? There are a few criteria and much of it is the person has to have been asked to leave the property, etc. Apparently you did not read it. We have no evidence at all he encountered anyone ever (like the homeowner) who told him to get out or leave the property. Georgia LAW which apparently the GBI is following.

I have told you from the start that I am not fond of media and their hype and I have repeated it more than once but just recently you accused my of following media hype and that my opinions come from there. I have looked up the law on trespassing and citizen's arrests and interpretations by attorneys and more (none of which match his buddy Barnhill by the way) and have watched the actual video clips.

No one needs an explanation of why Arbery was there prior and no one needs to give one. A citizen's arrest is based on catching someone in a certain act for one and then what they can do also has very specific paramaters and criteria. Arbery is not on trial here and cannot defend himself. Regardless, clearly they had no evidence of anything or he would have been arrested prior.

Your last argument goes against yourself imo. If theft was so common with contractors, that is why they don't leave them. If you are so certain Arbery was up to no good and the homeowner had video too, all of his contractors would be told to leave no tools. Arbery had been in there before allegedly (I don't think they have proof of identity but even if they did) and nothing was stolen or reported by the homeowner and no arrests were made. LE couldn't arrest him and had no proof of anything and neither did these men. That is so obvious it is like the sun in my eyes, how can you miss it?

None of what you say matters to the case imo, a defense may try the same, who knows as they don't have much imo other than such things. You go from self defense to now what was he up to when he was in there prior? You can assume he was up to anything you like prior, it still did not give them the right to go after him with firearms. Thank GOD the laws do not allow for that or we will have a child chased with firearms who just entered a neighbors' home next or an old man. Would the do that? I kind of doubt it. However, that is an assumption on my part but then almost everything you state are assumptions of what he was up to, what he was doing. You are judging Arbery with no real basis and no former evidence the way it look just as these men did. I am going to guess that clearly LE knew there was not enough to ever arrest him prior.

When you say I and others or the other poster, etc., I just want to make it clear they are all capable of answering for themselves and my remarks here are my view and I speak for no one else. I have also said I often am alone in some opinions through the past few years on some of my thoughts but I don't force my beliefs on anyone.

Kudos to sticking it out when you are the only one it appears, here at least, that has this opinion.

Always with respect unless I sense a lack of respect and then I will give it back.

One last point is that I have said repeatedly I doubt Arbery was a choir boy so whether his intent was nothing or whether it was bad, none of that to me makes any difference here because it has nothing to do with the choice these men made, they had no basis, no proof and they went way overboard. At minimum.

Jmo.

exactly about the tools left on site. If you get claims of theft from a property you will be told to remediate the problem. If it happens often, just like the people that get false entry alarms, they will either quit showing up or fine you. If you have insurance claims, your insurance will be telling you to remediate the issue or get dropped, then you have to explain to other insurance companies why you got dropped for something you should have taken care of yourself in order to not get dropped. Good luck with that.

 

[GrandmaBear]

exactly about the tools left on site. If you get claims of theft from a property you will be told to remediate the problem. If it happens often, just like the people that get false entry alarms, they will either quit showing up or fine you. If you have insurance claims, your insurance will be telling you to remediate the issue or get dropped, then you have to explain to other insurance companies why you got dropped for something you should have taken care of yourself in order to not get dropped. Good luck with that.

For sure! I worked years in insurance. The homeowner would be told to make sure all tools were secured or taken off of the property after one claim of theft. And in such claims, one thing the insurance company requires is a theft report made to your local LE and a copy of it. I am not going to go into detail but have enough contractors in my family, master plumbers, drywallers, electricians, etc. You DO NOT leave your tools at an open construction site and on big jobs, another entire story all together.

Yet it doesn't matter, does it? Because he did nothing that day that fits any law for what they decided and did. They are in deep doo-doo. And the third one was clearly not just a witness as his attorney tried to claim.

 

[Guess Who]

For sure! I worked years in insurance. The homeowner would be told to make sure all tools were secured or taken off of the property after one claim of theft. And in such claims, one thing the insurance company requires is a theft report made to your local LE and a copy of it. I am not going to go into detail but have enough contractors in my family, master plumbers, drywallers, electricians, etc. You DO NOT leave your tools at an open construction site and on big jobs, another entire story all together.

Yet it doesn't matter, does it? Because he did nothing that day that fits any law for what they decided and did. They are in deep doo-doo. And the third one was clearly not just a witness as his attorney tried to claim.

yes and that is why most construction sites also have locked containers to keep things not hauled off from the jobsites locked up in.

 

[KareBear]

Seriously? Did you not watch the video? No one was attacked in a vehicle.

Why exit the vehicle if you fear for your life?

 

[Howell]

It is not meaningless, they need reason to do what they did. It makes very much a difference what he did that day or if they saw him stealing etc.

The construction site at night has absolutely nothing to do with what happened that day. If they had something from that night and knew who it was, and that he had done something that he could be arrested for, he would have been arrested and charged.

It has everything to do with what happened that day. The repeated entries by Arbery at night on previous occasions provide a "reasonable suspicion" that his intent was criminal that day. That was likely the entire reason they pursued him.

i have not joined anyone with "possible" trespasser, I did what I do to determine my opinions and I looked up the Georgia law on it and posted it, perhaps you missed it? There are a few criteria and much of it is the person has to have been asked to leave the property, etc. Apparently you did not read it. We have no evidence at all he encountered anyone ever (like the homeowner) who told him to get out or leave the property. Georgia LAW which apparently the GBI is following.

I have told you from the start that I am not fond of media and their hype and I have repeated it more than once but just recently you accused my of following media hype and that my opinions come from there. I have looked up the law on trespassing and citizen's arrests and interpretations by attorneys and more (none of which match his buddy Barnhill by the way) and have watched the actual video clips.

Aren't you the one who called the McMichaels 'beer-swilling, redneck, racist idiots'? Where did you get that idea? You got it directly from the media.

No one needs an explanation of why Arbery was there prior and no one needs to give one. A citizen's arrest is based on catching someone in a certain act for one and then what they can do also has very specific paramaters and criteria. Arbery is not on trial here and cannot defend himself. Regardless, clearly they had no evidence of anything or he would have been arrested prior.

I'd like to have an explanation as to why Arbery was there, at night, on several prior occasions. I think the jury is going to want to know the same. I'd just like to hear what you think. What do you think his intent was?

 

[Cousin Dupree]

It has everything to do with what happened that day. The repeated entries by Arbery at night on previous occasions provide a "reasonable suspicion" that his intent was criminal that day. That was likely the entire reason they pursued him. Aren't you the one who called the McMichaels 'beer-swilling, redneck, racist idiots'? Where did you get that idea? You got it directly from the media.

I'd like to have an explanation as to why Arbery was there, at night, on several prior occasions. I think the jury is going to want to know the same. I'd just like to hear what you think. What do you think his intent was?

Where are you getting the information about Arbery having been in that house at night?

 

[GrandmaBear]

It has everything to do with what happened that day. The repeated entries by Arbery at night on previous occasions provide a "reasonable suspicion" that his intent was criminal that day. That was likely the entire reason they pursued him. Aren't you the one who called the McMichaels 'beer-swilling, redneck, racist idiots'? Where did you get that idea? You got it directly from the media.

I'd like to have an explanation as to why Arbery was there, at night, on several prior occasions. I think the jury is going to want to know the same. I'd just like to hear what you think. What do you think his intent was?

To my knowledge, whatever happened that night came straight from Mr. McMichael, and all there is was his word for it. It means very little to me and for all we know he was chasing him that night. I give it little credence. And I certainly disagree that it applies to the day they shot him.

As far as what I called them, no, it did not come from the media. What I did was something I rarely do, and that is to judge a book by its cover. I took one look at the mug shots, saw clips of the video and their behavior and judged them. The media does not sway me, in fact I have not had any news on in weeks and that is my usual way.

The jury is going to have the law explained to them. Like anyone, I guess they have to intuit their reasoning of why he was there, because there seems to be no proof of theft ever, etc. However, the judge will explain the law and tell them what must be found and what they can and cannot apply in their decision, as I am sure we are all aware of. I will say the McMichaels do have a chance if, no offense, they get a person or two on the jury like you, who no matter what, cannot see this as it apparently is. I think we should also keep in mind that no matter what the media says, this is not charged as a hate crime and Georgia does not have such a law. That is not what the jury will be determining imo. It wouldn't matter if they did the same thing to a young white man, a teenager, or an elderly woman of any race, it was still wrong. Maybe I should ask you what you think he was doing in there, but I think we know what you think, you have made that abundantly clear. It is odd to me if he was in there to steal and had been in there before, that no thefts ever occurred and why would he even think he would find anything in there if he had not prior and why would you think he was there to steal or vandalize when he had not prior?

The citizen's arrest law was created for retailers to hold/detain shoplifting subjects. Have you ever seen a shoplifter chased through a parking lot with employees in their cars with shotguns cornering him over a retail theft? And here we don't even have theft nor even breaking and entering. A shoplifter returns to the scene of the crime, the same store. An employee recognizes him and they likely watch him if not tell him to get out and escort him out or call LE. Do they chase him out with shotguns when this time he did not take anything yet? Of course not. Here with Arbery he never ever even took anything that we are aware of, so the shoplifting comparison I just gave is actually worse because again, Arbery took nothing.

I will even be generous and let's say they were worried Arbery had a gun and would turn it on them and even thought (wrongly) that he took something and they had the right to do as they did going after him in such a way. Again to go back to the store owner, citizen's arrest, etc., an employee or two perhaps pursues a suspect in the parking lot, ON FOOT, not in vehicles, they cannot act in the way these men did. There never would be a struggle for a shotgun as one would not be raised. They also generally quit pursuing once a suspect leaves the parking lot and await LE. THERE ARE RULES about citizen's arrests. I will add, ad nauseum, to repeat for the umpteenth time, we also had a former career LE officer/investigator involved here who should KNOWN that very well.

Shots rang out before Arbery ever tried to fight back for the gun as far as I can see. But, sigh, I could repeat this until the cows come home or the sun comes up, and it would make no difference. We disagree.

If you want me or anyone to guess what Arbery was doing there, then we should also be able to guess what the intent was of these three men or of each or what if they had even more time they may have done further. It is no different, it is still assumption and not fact. You also wouldn't like the possibilities that come to my mind and they sure are not from the media...

You have said very little about the third man's arrest if anything at all. It is stated, not by media, but by authorities, that they have plenty of video evidence and proof that he more than once participated and used his vehicle to assist to put it nicely...

And just for the fun of it, since he now is under arrest and I consider him a perp (I am not on the jury, jmo, thus far), I will judge his haircut. He reminds me of Gilligan/Bob Denver or Captain Kangaroo with his bangs. That isn't even an insult to him, for all you know I had a crush on Gilligan.... (Not).

 

[Guess Who]

It has everything to do with what happened that day. The repeated entries by Arbery at night on previous occasions provide a "reasonable suspicion" that his intent was criminal that day. That was likely the entire reason they pursued him. Aren't you the one who called the McMichaels 'beer-swilling, redneck, racist idiots'? Where did you get that idea? You got it directly from the media.

I'd like to have an explanation as to why Arbery was there, at night, on several prior occasions. I think the jury is going to want to know the same. I'd just like to hear what you think. What do you think his intent was?

So now you have to admit the media is skewing your opinion sinve you are stating as a fact that he was the only one seen there on multiple occasions, which were have absolutely no idea if thst is true and is very unlikely in reality. If you have actually worked on new construction, you know that it's a curiosity magnet.

 

[GrandmaBear]

So now you have to admit the media is skewing your opinion sinve you are stating as a fact that he was the only one seen there on multiple occasions, which were have absolutely no idea if thst is true and is very unlikely in reality. If you have actually worked on new construction, you know that it's a curiosity magnet.

Yep, for all we know he admired the neighborhood and saw the home and had a fantasy of living there and building a home one day in that neighborhood. For all we know if he was there more than once, he wanted to see what they did and how it turned out, liked the location, etc. That would be no more of an assumption than assuming he was there to vandalize or steal which is a big assumption considering IF he was there in the past, no such thing ever occurred...

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

It has everything to do with what happened that day. The repeated entries by Arbery at night on previous occasions provide a "reasonable suspicion" that his intent was criminal that day. That was likely the entire reason they pursued him.

Again, Arbery wasn't shot because he trespassed or because he refused to stop. That would be an entirely different story. He was shot because he ATTACKED THEM.

Make up your mind.

 

[daisy7]

Justice Department launching investigation into Ahmaud Arbery's death as a hate crime, family's attorneys say

U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Georgia said his office is looking into why Glynn County and the state of Georgia took so long to make arrests, Arbery's family's attorneys said.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[GrandmaBear]

Justice Department launching investigation into Ahmaud Arbery's death as a hate crime, family's attorneys say

U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Georgia said his office is looking into why Glynn County and the state of Georgia took so long to make arrests, Arbery's family's attorneys said.

www.cbsnews.com

All I can say is good! Not every case that is charged as a hate crime deserves to be imo but this one deserves to looked into because there are abundant reasons to do so and that is just from what we know to be fact and I am sure the GBI knows far more than we do. Two prosecutors recused but only after "helping" these men imo and the entire powers that be should be looked into there in that area. Imo, These men have not only killed and and irreparably damaged this young man's family, they also changed their own lives for good, they are now going to be part of an entire big political thing and probably a look at Georgia with no hate crime law and a look at the citizen's arrest law. Well, they made their choice as did these D.A.s. They didn't even try to hold them and act as if they were looking into things! Jmo.

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

4 minutes: New video shows length of time Ahmaud Arbery was chased before being killed, lawyer says

Lee Merritt, the civil rights attorney representing Arbery’s family, confirmed to Fox News Monday that the footage exists. It has not been made public.

www.kiro7.com

4 minutes: New video shows length of time Ahmaud Arbery was chased before being killed, lawyer says

New video footage and other evidence from the day Ahmaud Arbery was gunned down as he jogged in a predominantly white neighborhood near his Georgia home shows that the three men following him, including one who filmed his killing, chased him for more than four minutes before the fatal confrontation.

Lee Merritt, the civil rights attorney representing Arbery’s family, confirmed to Fox News Monday that the footage exists. It has not been made public.

Journalist and activist Shaun King, who has been working with Merritt on Arbery’s case, wrote on Facebook Saturday that he and Merritt had confirmed that the previously-seen footage of Arbery’s Feb. 23 shotgun death was just a snippet of the footage that had been recorded by William “Roddie” Bryan, one of the three men chasing the unarmed black jogger through the Satilla Shores neighborhood of Brunswick.