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.”

 

[GrandmaBear]

No, it's not that simple. The choice of words has meaning. I'm not making this about race; the media and you guys are. He could have simply said "Arbery" or even "the shooting victim". That would've been a more clear description. He said "the black guy" for a reason. And frankly, given your posts on the matter, you're in no position to be defending another's words with regard to race. You've yet to tell us how you came to think the McMichaels were "racist idiots". You say you 'judged a book by its cover'. Which cover? What about the appearance of the McMichaels led you to believe they're "racist idiots"?

I called the cops once about an incident years ago taking place where I was. One of the first things I was asked was if the offenders were black or white. I don't find it all that unusual for anyone when describing someone to do that. And considering the discussion here, it makes total sense.

As far as telling me I am in no position to defend, go ahead, if that is supposed to irk me, it does not. You rarely have a post you do not slip in something like that or an insult towards others.

As far as what I have said about the McMichaels, I have owned those words previously more than once have I not? I have also said it is not something I typically do but I am not going to go further down that road other than suffice it to say pickups, guns, Georgia and more, including their behavior and add in the attitudes and looks.

You are the only one assuming McMichaels was there to steal and you have said the same about not another person that was seen in there. Why is that? The only black guy? And don't give me the garbage about him being there more than once as he never took a thing prior not even damaged anything.

 

[GrandmaBear]

What you continue to call an "assumption" is actually called a reasonable inference. What would you think if you saw someone going through a neighbor's vacant house at night with a flashlight? How about prying at a window with a crowbar? Would you make any "assumptions" about that behavior? Of course you would.

There's really nothing left for us to say on the matter, GB. I think the McMichaels had enough information within their immediate knowledge to justify a reasonable suspicion. They had the right to be armed, and they certainly had the right to go try and talk to Arbery, which is what they did. His being shot was a direct result of him attacking them. I understand you and others disagree. The jury will hear ALL of the legally pertinent information(not just what the media share) and make their decision.With no condescension intended, please be more careful when quoting or paraphrasing what I've said. I believe the vast majority of cops will lie and cover for their fellow officers when necessary. That's different from being "dirty".

I don't like playing semantics and assumption or inference, call it whatever you like.

There is something called the law and people are charged when they go against the applicable laws.

You are wrong and assuming what i would "assume" or "infer". What I would do in the case of seeing any of the people who were in the house would be to call or notify the homeowner and make sure he was aware of it, with all of those I saw enter. I may call LE and tell them what I noticed. That's it. If the homeowner also told me there had been no thefts or vandalism and he was aware of entries and had a security camera, I would leave it at that. If he asked me to keep an eye out and call him, I would pay attention when I was out and about and that's it. There is no way in H I would go after anyone doing such a thing with firearms and cut them off. I may pay attention to which way they went in case someone asked. If I knew there was a camera in the construction site, I am not sure I would even do the aforementioned. I may just wait and if I see the homeowner there one day or his crew, walk over and mention it to them.

I also disagree that the vast majority of cops would lie and cover when it is in their face and they are on a witness stand under oath with an incident as big as this one is. I also disagree that that is not "dirty". Also, if you believe what you are saying, then the vast majority of cops will cover for McMichaels who was a former cop?

Next you will argue about po-tay-to or po-tah-to, creek or crick, wash or warsh... I ain't going to say the word ain't just to see if next you want to play grammar nazi

All in lightness and jmo.

 

[GrandmaBear]

@Howell - Your words

"With no condescension intended, please be more careful when quoting or paraphrasing what I've said. I believe the vast majority of cops will lie and cover for their fellow officers when necessary. That's different from being "dirty". "

This is really rich, coming from one who constantly assumes, infers, puts words in other's mouths and tells them media influences them or they get their opinions from media. Seems just a wee bit like hypocrisy to me. The examples are endless. Just sayin'

 

[Howell]

Ask yourself why the person that made the video chose such a small piece of what he filmed if it was supposed to show what supposedly really happened. The media had nothing to do with that. The media had nothing to do with LE stating that there was a LOT more video of the incident and that is what led to charges.

The person who made the video made no such choice. He didn't choose what was released to the media. What on earth are you talking about?!
The media chose to show you what they wanted you to see. If LE states that they have a lot more video, it is incumbent upon the media to demand that footage; that's their job. Let us all see it. Let us see this video that is so incriminating. You haven't seen it. Nobody has seen it. Again, ask yourself why.

 

[GrandmaBear]

The person who made the video made no such choice. He didn't choose what was released to the media. What on earth are you talking about?!
The media chose to show you what they wanted you to see. If LE states that they have a lot more video, it is incumbent upon the media to demand that footage; that's their job. Let us all see it. Let us see this video that is so incriminating. You haven't seen it. Nobody has seen it. Again, ask yourself why.

What on Mars are you talking about? The media can demand footage or file a motion for public release I guess but good luck with that. LE will release what they choose while an investigation is pending and likely, little. It is NOT their job to demand anything. There is already more video out there than I suspect you have seen. Good grief. Ignore her main point as you do with everyone's, that the GBI, NOT the media, said there is much more footage. Smh.

 

[Howell]

I don't like playing semantics and assumption or inference, call it whatever you like.

There is something called the law and people are charged when they go against the applicable laws.

You are wrong and assuming what i would "assume" or "infer". What I would do in the case of seeing any of the people who were in the house would be to call or notify the homeowner and make sure he was aware of it, with all of those I saw enter. I may call LE and tell them what I noticed. That's it. If the homeowner also told me there had been no thefts or vandalism and he was aware of entries and had a security camera, I would leave it at that. If he asked me to keep an eye out and call him, I would pay attention when I was out and about and that's it. There is no way in H I would go after anyone doing such a thing with firearms and cut them off. I may pay attention to which way they went in case someone asked. If I knew there was a camera in the construction site, I am not sure I would even do the aforementioned. I may just wait and if I see the homeowner there one day or his crew, walk over and mention it to them.

OK, so you acknowledge that you may call LE or take other actions because you made "assumptions" about what that person was doing. That's my only point. You agree then that it's reasonable to make such "assumptions" and to take action. Of course, as a woman, while you may not be willing to pursue someone, a lot of men would be. That's what the McMichaels did.

I also disagree that the vast majority of cops would lie and cover when it is in their face and they are on a witness stand under oath with an incident as big as this one is. I also disagree that that is not "dirty". Also, if you believe what you are saying, then the vast majority of cops will cover for McMichaels who was a former cop?

Next you will argue about po-tay-to or po-tah-to, creek or crick, wash or warsh... I ain't going to say the word ain't just to see if next you want to play grammar nazi

All in lightness and jmo.

We just disagree on cops then. In my view, a "dirty" cop is a thief and/or abuser. I think they're a relatively small minority of cops, but when put in a position to choose, I believe the vast majority of them will choose to support and defend a fellow cop, even if they know he's a thief and/or abuser. And yes, I agree, most cops would cover for McMichaels, and I'm not so sure that didn't happen here. You think I'm adamant in my opinion, but I'm actually on the fence in this case.

And for the record, it's po-tay-to, creek, and wash. Ain't no doubt about that.

 

[Howell]

What on Mars are you talking about? The media can demand footage or file a motion for public release I guess but good luck with that. LE will release what they choose while an investigation is pending and likely, little. It is NOT their job to demand anything. There is already more video out there than I suspect you have seen. Good grief. Ignore her main point as you do with everyone's, that the GBI, NOT the media, said there is much more footage. Smh.

Answer the question. How is Bryan responsible for what was released to the media? He isn't. He had no say in the matter.

It absolutely is the job of the media to hold the government responsible. If the GBI(government) claims that there is more video to justify these charges, the media have a responsibility to demand that video, or demand an explanation as to why only the other footage was released.

 

[Guess Who]

What on Mars are you talking about? The media can demand footage or file a motion for public release I guess but good luck with that. LE will release what they choose while an investigation is pending and likely, little. It is NOT their job to demand anything. There is already more video out there than I suspect you have seen. Good grief. Ignore her main point as you do with everyone's, that the GBI, NOT the media, said there is much more footage. Smh.

but we're the ones being influenced by the media. smh.

 

[Guess Who]

The person who made the video made no such choice. He didn't choose what was released to the media. What on earth are you talking about?!
The media chose to show you what they wanted you to see. If LE states that they have a lot more video, it is incumbent upon the media to demand that footage; that's their job. Let us all see it. Let us see this video that is so incriminating. You haven't seen it. Nobody has seen it. Again, ask yourself why.

The attorney for Bryan is the one that released the video TO the media. So again ask yourself why he only released a very small clip of it and why he had an attorney to start with and how releasing this very small clip was helping his client.

Brunswick attorney says he released deadly shooting video because ‘people had right to know’

A Brunswick attorney says he is the one who released a cellphone video of the controversial February shooting death of 25-year-old Ahmaud Arbery.

www.news4jax.com

 

[Guess Who]

Answer the question. How is Bryan responsible for what was released to the media? He isn't. He had no say in the matter.

It absolutely is the job of the media to hold the government responsible. If the GBI(government) claims that there is more video to justify these charges, the media have a responsibility to demand that video, or demand an explanation as to why only the other footage was released.

his attorney is the one that posted it.

 

[GrandmaBear]

OK, so you acknowledge that you may call LE or take other actions because you made "assumptions" about what that person was doing. That's my only point. You agree then that it's reasonable to make such "assumptions" and to take action. Of course, as a woman, while you may not be willing to pursue someone, a lot of men would be. That's what the McMichaels did. We just disagree on cops then. In my view, a "dirty" cop is a thief and/or abuser. I think they're a relatively small minority of cops, but when put in a position to choose, I believe the vast majority of them will choose to support and defend a fellow cop, even if they know he's a thief and/or abuser. And yes, I agree, most cops would cover for McMichaels, and I'm not so sure that didn't happen here. You think I'm adamant in my opinion, but I'm actually on the fence in this case.

And for the record, it's po-tay-to, creek, and wash. Ain't no doubt about that.

No, I don't acknowledge any such thing. My first thought would actually be that someone may get hurt as it is a construction site and in this backwards world, they would sue the homeowner. My next though would be does the homeowner know and if he does, and is not concerned or such, then I wash my hands of it. Certainly it is no excuse for ME to go hunt them down with guns for walking in an empty house that is not even mine?! Quite honestly, that is insane when one thinks about it. Smh it has nothing to do with being a woman and I am not touching that one with a ten foot pole. As for cops, we probably are not that far off, I am well aware of the the "blue" code and believe it does exist yet and in many places. I choose to believe the vast majority is not like discussed, however, it is hard to say, power often goes to one's head and it would be a tough job in most cases. However, if the department overall is a good one, it is not necessary to lie for something like this as it would not occur in the first place. I do believe the McMichaels were not arrested because of who they know but that is an opinion. To me a dirty cop is one who lies, covers, steals, abuses or any of it. Semantics, ain't that?

I am off to cook my po-tay-toes and slice my to-mah-toes lol.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Answer the question. How is Bryan responsible for what was released to the media? He isn't. He had no say in the matter.

It absolutely is the job of the media to hold the government responsible. If the GBI(government) claims that there is more video to justify these charges, the media have a responsibility to demand that video, or demand an explanation as to why only the other footage was released.

I don't see much responsible media any longer, nor many good investigative journalists, so when you talk about them doing their job, you are talking a foreign concept to me.

You ignore questions quite often and parts of points, so don't order me to answer your question. Even so, I will.

This was Bryan's video! How did he not have control of it? Of course he did. These three had so much time, he could have gotten rid of it had he wanted. It was HIS video. No say? It backfired on him is what happened.

 

[GrandmaBear]

but we're the ones being influenced by the media. smh.

Yup.

 

[Guess Who]

No, I don't acknowledge any such thing. My first thought would actually be that someone may get hurt as it is a construction site and in this backwards world, they would sue the homeowner. My next though would be does the homeowner know and if he does, and is not concerned or such, then I wash my hands of it. Certainly it is no excuse for ME to go hunt them down with guns for walking in an empty house that is not even mine?! Quite honestly, that is insane when one thinks about it. Smh it has nothing to do with being a woman and I am not touching that one with a ten foot pole. As for cops, we probably are not that far off, I am well aware of the the "blue" code and believe it does exist yet and in many places. I choose to believe the vast majority is not like discussed, however, it is hard to say, power often goes to one's head and it would be a tough job in most cases. However, if the department overall is a good one, it is not necessary to lie for something like this as it would not occur in the first place. I do believe the McMichaels were not arrested because of who they know but that is an opinion. To me a dirty cop is one who lies, covers, steals, abuses or any of it. Semantics, ain't that?

I am off to cook my po-tay-toes and slice my to-mah-toes lol.

But the real question here is are you cooking and slicing by a creek or a crick?

 

[GrandmaBear]

But the real question here is are you cooking and slicing by a creek or a crick?

Well I am doing it by the crick and I have a creek in my neck... Lol.

 

[Guess Who]

I'd say this says a whole lot about why they went after him

Testimony: Shooter used racist slur as Arbery lay dying

BRUNSWICK, Ga. (AP) — A state investigator testified Thursday that a white man was heard saying a racist slur as he stood over Ahmaud Arbery's body, moments after fatally shooting the black man with a pump-action shotgun.

apnews.com

 

[daisy7]

Judge finds probable cause against 3 suspects in Ahmaud Arbery case

The three men accused of murdering Ahmaud Arbery are scheduled for probable cause hearings in Brunswick today amid nationwide protests over the killing of another unarmed black man — George Floyd — in Minneapolis.

www.ajc.com

 

[kdg411]

charges for all 3 have been bound over to Superior Court

Judge finds probable cause against 3 suspects in Ahmaud Arbery case

The three men accused of murdering Ahmaud Arbery are scheduled for probable cause hearings in Brunswick today amid nationwide protests over the killing of another unarmed black man — George Floyd — in Minneapolis.

www.ajc.com

 

[GrandmaBear]

I'd say this says a whole lot about why they went after him

Testimony: Shooter used racist slur as Arbery lay dying

BRUNSWICK, Ga. (AP) — A state investigator testified Thursday that a white man was heard saying a racist slur as he stood over Ahmaud Arbery's body, moments after fatally shooting the black man with a pump-action shotgun.

apnews.com

Sadly, I cannot say I am one bit surprised. Racial slurs and the first shot was to the chest. Raised the rifle beforehand. Per testimony... And more...

 

[GrandmaBear]

Judge finds probable cause against 3 suspects in Ahmaud Arbery case

The three men accused of murdering Ahmaud Arbery are scheduled for probable cause hearings in Brunswick today amid nationwide protests over the killing of another unarmed black man — George Floyd — in Minneapolis.

www.ajc.com

Wow. Again, I don't think most of us are surprised. Bryan claimed to be only a witness, hmph.