Jogger Chased and Shot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Once he ran around the truck to punch and grab the shot gun he was the perpetrator. That put it in another light completely. He knew why they wanted to question him, and why he ran from the home. He was seen. Yes they should have waited for the cops, but the guy with the shot gun was clearly attacked.

He was under no obligation to answer their questions. They were not the property owner. They were not authorized to act on behalf of the property owner (security guards.) They were not the police.

He had every right to walk (run) away from them. They had no right to hunt him down and trap him.

True. He could have run in many directions and off the street. He instead chose to assault shotgun guy.

If he had, they would have shot him even sooner, but in the back.

No. They wanted to see why he was in the home, and detain him until the cops arrived. They didn't expect him to turn and rush the guy with the gun.

It wasn't their home. Why was it their business if he was in the home? All they should have done is call the police to report something suspicious and give the best description they could. That's it. No need to "detain him" themselves.

Agree. Maybe they were the unofficial neighborhood watch but since the one was a former cop he should have known better. A lot of stupid choices.

This whole incident seems to be a case of stupid people’s lives intersecting and one side being armed.

I think with the trial we'll find out just how stupid they all were. And maybe why they did what they all did.

I bet there's text message traffic between the perpetrators.

Yup. https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/prosecutors-intend-to-use-racist-social-media-posts-texts-against-men-charged-in-ahmaud-arberys-murder/

[Anonymous]

I guess there aren’t a ton of people following the trial closely.

They went back and forth on jury instructions Friday. The judge said he was planning to instruct the jury on the entire citizen’s arrest law, which the defense claimed was going to gut their arguments. They wanted only half of it read to the jury.

The whole case kind of rides on whether or not probable suspicion of a felony three months prior was allowed in the law, or if they could only give chase if a felony was just committed. The judge said the latter, but will accept weekend briefs to the contrary.

[Anonymous]

Did anyone else catch the comments of the defense lawyer who said the following about Arbery:

"Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails," Hogue told jurors.

I've never before seen such a blatant appeal to the basest instincts of an almost all-white jury. It's outrageous and deliberate and confirms that, among other biases, racism is alive and well.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-long-dirty-toenails/38330260#

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone else catch the comments of the defense lawyer who said the following about Arbery:

"Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails," Hogue told jurors.

I've never before seen such a blatant appeal to the basest instincts of an almost all-white jury. It's outrageous and deliberate and confirms that, among other biases, racism is alive and well.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-long-dirty-toenails/38330260#

She’s an a$$hole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone else catch the comments of the defense lawyer who said the following about Arbery:

"Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails," Hogue told jurors.

I've never before seen such a blatant appeal to the basest instincts of an almost all-white jury. It's outrageous and deliberate and confirms that, among other biases, racism is alive and well.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-long-dirty-toenails/38330260#

She’s an a$$hole.

I think it is pretty obvious that she is pointing out he wasn't out there jogging for his health. Not very polite rhetoric and it won't change a thing in the case but that's her point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone else catch the comments of the defense lawyer who said the following about Arbery:

"Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails," Hogue told jurors.

I've never before seen such a blatant appeal to the basest instincts of an almost all-white jury. It's outrageous and deliberate and confirms that, among other biases, racism is alive and well.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-long-dirty-toenails/38330260#

She’s an a$$hole.

I think it is pretty obvious that she is pointing out he wasn't out there jogging for his health. Not very polite rhetoric and it won't change a thing in the case but that's her point.

She lied about what he is wearing. Lawyers can lie in closing arguments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess there aren’t a ton of people following the trial closely.

They went back and forth on jury instructions Friday. The judge said he was planning to instruct the jury on the entire citizen’s arrest law, which the defense claimed was going to gut their arguments. They wanted only half of it read to the jury.

The whole case kind of rides on whether or not probable suspicion of a felony three months prior was allowed in the law, or if they could only give chase if a felony was just committed. The judge said the latter, but will accept weekend briefs to the contrary.

I just can't anymore. Too f-ing depressing.

[Anonymous]

They hunted and shot an unarmed man ... next

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone else catch the comments of the defense lawyer who said the following about Arbery:

"Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails," Hogue told jurors.

I've never before seen such a blatant appeal to the basest instincts of an almost all-white jury. It's outrageous and deliberate and confirms that, among other biases, racism is alive and well.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-long-dirty-toenails/38330260#

She made a big deal out if his toenails earlier, too. I was disgusted with her attempt at othering him before, and I hope the jury is, too. That was a risk to the defense, and a poorly calculated one, IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone else catch the comments of the defense lawyer who said the following about Arbery:

"Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails," Hogue told jurors.

I've never before seen such a blatant appeal to the basest instincts of an almost all-white jury. It's outrageous and deliberate and confirms that, among other biases, racism is alive and well.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-long-dirty-toenails/38330260#

She made a big deal out if his toenails earlier, too. I was disgusted with her attempt at othering him before, and I hope the jury is, too. That was a risk to the defense, and a poorly calculated one, IMO.

Her face is uglier than the toenails she describes. "Turning Ahmad Aubrey into a victim" He's the one that's dead butter face!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone else catch the comments of the defense lawyer who said the following about Arbery:

"Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails," Hogue told jurors.

I've never before seen such a blatant appeal to the basest instincts of an almost all-white jury. It's outrageous and deliberate and confirms that, among other biases, racism is alive and well.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-long-dirty-toenails/38330260#

She’s an a$$hole.

I think it is pretty obvious that she is pointing out he wasn't out there jogging for his health. Not very polite rhetoric and it won't change a thing in the case but that's her point.

The bigger problem is the family having racist divisive figures like Sharpton and Jackson. Obviously to intimidate the jury which might backfire.
At this point I think it's been well established why he kept going back to that construction site. The neighbors had valid reason to pursue (though not wise), and ask why he kept going into their neighbors home. Obviously the one didn't expect to be attacked, nor his gun taken.

[Anonymous]

Prosecutor gave an effective closing. (Didn’t see the rebuttal.)

Defense lawyer for shooter completely reframed the events and did a good job for his client. Right up till he asked the jurors to reach a hand to pull his client out of trouble.

Defense lawyer for father was as described in PP’s.

Defense lawyer for driver of second truck tried reinterpreting/reframing evidence and shifting blame to other shooters. Multiple long, deep sighs as if he was boring even himself.

The decedent was no angel and may have been up to mischief. But chasing him down and blasting him when he tried to escape wasn’t the right thing to do.

Best guess is a conviction, although the father’s direct involvement seemed fairly minimal and the judge did give lesser included instructions for the second driver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone else catch the comments of the defense lawyer who said the following about Arbery:

"Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails," Hogue told jurors.

I've never before seen such a blatant appeal to the basest instincts of an almost all-white jury. It's outrageous and deliberate and confirms that, among other biases, racism is alive and well.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-long-dirty-toenails/38330260#

She’s an a$$hole.

I think it is pretty obvious that she is pointing out he wasn't out there jogging for his health. Not very polite rhetoric and it won't change a thing in the case but that's her point.

The bigger problem is the family having racist divisive figures like Sharpton and Jackson. Obviously to intimidate the jury which might backfire.
At this point I think it's been well established why he kept going back to that construction site. The neighbors had valid reason to pursue (though not wise), and ask why he kept going into their neighbors home. Obviously the one didn't expect to be attacked, nor his gun taken.

The problem is he was wearing jogging shorts but she used alt-right imagery that he had “khakis” on, which is a lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone else catch the comments of the defense lawyer who said the following about Arbery:

"Turning Ahmaud Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought Ahmaud Arbery to Satilla Shores in his khaki shorts with no socks to cover his long, dirty toenails," Hogue told jurors.

I've never before seen such a blatant appeal to the basest instincts of an almost all-white jury. It's outrageous and deliberate and confirms that, among other biases, racism is alive and well.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-long-dirty-toenails/38330260#

She’s an a$$hole.

I think it is pretty obvious that she is pointing out he wasn't out there jogging for his health. Not very polite rhetoric and it won't change a thing in the case but that's her point.

The bigger problem is the family having racist divisive figures like Sharpton and Jackson. Obviously to intimidate the jury which might backfire.
At this point I think it's been well established why he kept going back to that construction site. The neighbors had valid reason to pursue (though not wise), and ask why he kept going into their neighbors home. Obviously the one didn't expect to be attacked, nor his gun taken.

Good old Georgia, you can run down a black man in your pick up truck chase them with a gun and then kill them if they try to resit or fight back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prosecutor gave an effective closing. (Didn’t see the rebuttal.)

Defense lawyer for shooter completely reframed the events and did a good job for his client. Right up till he asked the jurors to reach a hand to pull his client out of trouble.

Defense lawyer for father was as described in PP’s.

Defense lawyer for driver of second truck tried reinterpreting/reframing evidence and shifting blame to other shooters. Multiple long, deep sighs as if he was boring even himself.

The decedent was no angel and may have been up to mischief. But chasing him down and blasting him when he tried to escape wasn’t the right thing to do.

Best guess is a conviction, although the father’s direct involvement seemed fairly minimal and the judge did give lesser included instructions for the second driver.

lol
The decedent ran across the front of the truck to punch and get control of the gun. He wasn't shot trying to escape, nor was it ever their intent to shoot him. They tried to ask him why he was in the neighbors house when he attacked.