Georgia shooting of a black man

I still find it interesting that I am the only one comparing this to the Zimmerman case. I would argue that if there was any video evidence in the Zman case, it would look exactly like this.

Were these guys on the phone with 911 at the time of the incident trying to get a police response?
Was the shotgun holstered prior to the physical contact?
Was the individual with the shotgun on his way back to his vehicle when hit from behind?
Was the individual with the shotgun on his back being grounded and pounded into the sidewalk when the shot was fired?

These are just a few very major discrepancies between the Zimmerman case and this one that I can see right off the top.

Not defending Zimmerman in the least. I think he's an ass, but based upon the evidence presented at his trial, in which he was acquitted of murder, the facts in his case do not at all align with the video above. Other than the race of the person who was shot.
 
No, it isn't, not even close. Zimmerman was attacked while carrying a concealed firearm. The issue there was at some point during the altercation it was a fight for the gun. Now if Zimmerman had attacked Trayvon with a gun in his hand it would be similar.

V

lol says who? The guy who killed a kid and lived? And as seen literally in this case, if some asshole shows up with a gun as you're minding your own business, you have every right to fight back. Zimmerman is a murderer and so are these 2 thugs.
 
More to the point, we have no idea if the guys had been LEO what the individual would have done. He could have stopped and had a pleasant conversation and gone on his way. Or he could have attacked. We'll never know because 2 asshats with hero complexes decided they were the law, stalked, assaulted and ultimately murdered he guy.

I can't quite get to where you are.
  • Did they take the law into their hands? Yes, and that may be legal in Georgia.
  • Did they stalk and assault the black man? Maybe, or maybe they legally pursued and attempted to legally arrest him.
  • Did they murder the black man? Maybe, or maybe it was a matter of self defense.
The fact that Georgia has a citizen's arrest law really confuses the issue from start to finish.
  • If the guys were not justified to use the citizen's arrest law, it was a matter of stalking, assault, and murder.
  • If the guys qualified to use the citizen's arrest law, it may have been a justified arrest and homicide in self defense, or it may have been something in between.
 
lol says who? The guy who killed a kid and lived? And as seen literally in this case, if some asshole shows up with a gun as you're minding your own business, you have every right to fight back. Zimmerman is a murderer and so are these 2 thugs.

Again wrong, there was a witness. The witness testimony backed the injuries sustained by Zimmerman. Zimmerman, in my opinion, should have been charged with something. People have hard times staying on topic, everyone want s to go off on tangents. If you understand stand your ground law Zimmerman was not going to be found guilty of first degree murder. Trayvon got pissed at being followed and attacked Zimmerman who was armed. The two cases are not similar.
 
Googlefu produces this result:

O.C.G.A. 17-4-60 (2010)
17-4-60. Grounds for arrest


A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

https://law.justia.com/codes/georgi...XVqHsmUmbBnMoIz0sVQFYv8KGwTL-zA20ruYIyjgnTLIU


I think that bold part may prove problematic for the McMichaels....
 
lol says who? The guy who killed a kid and lived? And as seen literally in this case, if some asshole shows up with a gun as you're minding your own business, you have every right to fight back. Zimmerman is a murderer and so are these 2 thugs.
Nope Zimmerman was not convicted of anything. So he is innocent. It was self defense against a drug addled punk.
 
I see why you make that comment. But, no, it would not have been justified if the exact same sequence happened while the 2 asshats wore uniforms.
My point in harping on the "They are not LEO" is to reinforce the fact that these 2 took it upon themselves to play cop when they had zero business doing so.
I assumed not. Couldn’t resist poking the bear.
“So what you’re saying” is a phrase a witch Brit dame uses to twist an interviewee’s words. She’s now a meme.
upload_2020-5-7_16-17-6.jpeg

The video looks horrific & he appears to be a cold blooded murderer.
Waiting to hear the rest of the story.
 
Last edited:
No i disagree, read the article, the people have ties to the court and Law enforcement, this happened three months ago without any arrests. The victims family lawyer released the video because nothing was being done.

Does anyone know if Georgia has laws that would allow a citizens arrest and if so on what grounds?

I'm well aware. Georgia does have citizen's arrest law, which is what they are using to excuse this murder.
 
lol says who? The guy who killed a kid and lived? And as seen literally in this case, if some asshole shows up with a gun as you're minding your own business, you have every right to fight back. Zimmerman is a murderer and so are these 2 thugs.

Wow bro...you shoulda sat this one out if thats your official take on what went down. Sounds an aweful lot like you read a few memes, maybe watched a bit of CNN, and then turned the ol thinkin'meat off. Zimmerman aint a saint, but his actions and the actions of Bubba1 and Bubba2 here are quite dissimilar. The only thing that even remotely makes them similar is that a blank man was killed in dubious circumstances. Those actual circumstances being vastly different as explained quite well above by RR.
 
I don't agree. Zman chased down a kid that was doing nothing illegal and tried to stop him. 911 told Zman to stay in his car but Zman wanted to play cop. Just like this case. The only difference is there is video evidence in this one. The cases are very similar.
 
I don't agree. Zman chased down a kid that was doing nothing illegal and tried to stop him. 911 told Zman to stay in his car but Zman wanted to play cop. Just like this case. The only difference is there is video evidence in this one. The cases are very similar.

What does that other case with other people in another state and time have to do with this one? It's only brought up in the article to incite the reader.
 
I don't agree. Zman chased down a kid that was doing nothing illegal and tried to stop him. 911 told Zman to stay in his car but Zman wanted to play cop. Just like this case. The only difference is there is video evidence in this one. The cases are very similar.

lol exactly. People want to be blind and have the gun slinger be a hero.

Both cases: Rambos chased down unarmed, lawfully acting, literally walking/jogging down the road black men & start shit so they could gun them down in cold blood. Disgusting.
 
What does that other case with other people in another state and time have to do with this one? It's only brought up in the article to incite the reader.

Well, I can't help you if you don't see the similarities.
 
Well, I can't help you if you don't see the similarities.
I can see them. This case reminds me of that case. I just think that doesn't mean anything, and worse, confuses the issue.
 
I dunno. I can't see much in this Georgia video, but there appears to maybe be someone trying to take a long-gun away from someone.

Ok
So whose gun is it?
Why was it presented?
 
They are not LEO ... They aren't LEO. ...
They are not LEO... They are not LEO ... They are not LEO.
I like this part a lot. So, if they were, it would be ok to shoot an unarmed person? Shouldn't we excuse them then? They just forget but they aren't LEO anymore. Thanks to the chorus of "they are LEO" and "thin blue line" enablers, these guys see no problem to shoot an unarmed person. "These guys should return home to their families". They aren't LEO anymore? So what?
 
I'll go a step further then you guys may have dug. If I were local to that area, I'd be demanding the second prosecutor to recuse himself be fired. He recused himself for personal reasons. Then he makes a statement trying to exonerate those two based on some rather dubious reasoning IMO. Good that he recused. But I would not want him representing the state in anything after his comments.

To paraphrase, people that don't want to make statements don't make statements about not making statements. He should have kept his non legal opinion to himself when he stepped away.
 
Last edited:
Ok
So whose gun is it?
Why was it presented?

My understanding is that the gun belonged to the pickup driver, who either exited the driver's door gun in hand, or pulled it from the truck as jogger runs toward him. The jogger abruptly adjusts his path to move forward up passenger side, then the the jogger cuts left in front of the truck and apparently charges the man with the gun.
 
Last edited:
I'm waiting for act 2 when the police come in and forcibly disperse the inevitable raging protests coming up, cause you-know..covid.

This is gonna be good.
 


Another news clip had the 911 call in progress, operator asked the caller if the individual has committed a crime, caller said the guy was looking into houses, it was an ongoing thing, man said the guy was running away. The man was told that was OK and she was sending the police.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that the gun belonged to the pickup driver, who likely exited the driver's door gun i n hand. The jogger adjusts his path to move forward up passenger side, the the jogger cuts left in front of the truck and apparently charges the man with the gun.
Just for clarity, you believe the jogger is in the wrong because he charged a man blocking his path with a shotgun. That the man with the shotgun was innocent and was in no way threatening or otherwise interfering with or intending to interfere with the jogger, while he was going about his own business? That the shotgun was incidental to the confrontation?
 
I like this part a lot. So, if they were, it would be ok to shoot an unarmed person? Shouldn't we excuse them then? They just forget but they aren't LEO anymore. Thanks to the chorus of "they are LEO" and "thin blue line" enablers, these guys see no problem to shoot an unarmed person. "These guys should return home to their families". They aren't LEO anymore? So what?

If they were LEO and asked him to stop and he tried to take the LEO gun, then yes it would have been a justified shooting. These guys had no authority to tell this kid jogging down the street to do anything.
 
Just for clarity, you believe the jogger is in the wrong because he charged a man blocking his path with a shotgun. That the man with the shotgun was innocent and was in no way threatening or otherwise interfering with or intending to interfere with the jogger, while he was going about his own business? That the shotgun was incidental to the confrontation?

I can't say the jogger is in the wrong, I can't say the driver is innocent. The driver seems to have created or at least escalated an adversarial situation. If, however, I have a gun in hand, in a holster, or even concealed, and a man charges me, I'd consider myself to be in a gun fight at the beginning of physical contact. What either of us was "thinking", or whether either or both of us was a jerk, a thief, or an angel, would have little to do with it at that point.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that the gun belonged to the pickup driver, who either exited the driver's door gun in hand, or pulled it from the truck as jogger runs toward him. The jogger abruptly adjusts his path to move forward up passenger side, then the the jogger cuts left in front of the truck and apparently charges the man with the gun.
Where did that information come from?

I must have missed in in the earlier article
 
Last edited:
Already tried and convicted by most of CFF I see. We've been down this road multiple times..

No mention so far of multiple 911 calls placed or the fact that he was inside a home that was under construction just prior to his "jog." His mom said in one article that he was always curious and probably just wanted to see the houses bones... A curious 25yo committing what (depending on state law) may be a felony.

State law should determine the outcome of this incident, not feelings. There's not enough info in the OP article or in the video for me to decide.

The media certainly has run off with this. I'll reserve judgement until all the evidence is presented.
 
Last edited:
I don't agree. Zman chased down a kid that was doing nothing illegal and tried to stop him. 911 told Zman to stay in his car but Zman wanted to play cop. Just like this case. The only difference is there is video evidence in this one. The cases are very similar.
Just what was he convicted of? Oh nothing, thats right. He shot a drugged up punk that needed shooting.
 
So how is the guy in the back of the truck a murderer? He was standing there with a dog...

Not sure, but GA may have a felony murder rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
If they were LEO and asked him to stop and he tried to take the LEO gun, then yes it would have been a justified shooting. These guys had no authority to tell this kid jogging down the street to do anything.

Georgia has a citizen's arrest law.
O.C.G.A. 17-4-60 (2010) - 17-4-60. Grounds for arrest
A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.
Unless you can cite Georgia case law on citizen's arrests, you probably know as little about the "authority" the guys had as the rest of us.

I have no idea what level of authority is associated with Georgia's citizen's arrest law. The authority could range anywhere from "please cooperate" to substantially the same as a LEO. Without that critical information, any conclusion about the shooting is about as authoritative as a fart.
 
Last edited:
Already tried and convicted by most of CFF I see. We've been down this road multiple times..

No mention so far of multiple 911 calls placed or the fact that he was inside a home that was under construction just prior to his "jog." His mom said in one article that he was always curious and probably just wanted to see the houses bones... A curious 25yo committing what (depending on state law) may be a felony.

State law should determine the outcome of this incident, not feelings. There's not enough info in the OP article or in the video for me to decide.

The media certainly has run off with this. I'll reserve judgement until all the evidence is presented.

I would check out the homes under construction on my block and nobody called 911 on me.
 
Amazing that Joe Biden can remember he has a Twitter account. "The video is clear: Ahmaud Arbery was killed in cold blood," Biden tweeted Tuesday, calling for an investigation. "My heart goes out to his family, who deserve justice and deserve it now."
 
I would check out the homes under construction on my block and nobody called 911 on me.
Heck, I did it last week

Ya'll walk INSIDE of other peoples houses under construction on your block (that you don't know/have permission to be in)?

That's simple respect of others property, it isn't mine, I have no reason to be there and don't need to be plundering around in it. I'm a bit surprised ya'll find that behavior acceptable.

Depending on state law, crossing the threshold of the house may be considered b&e and like I said, possibly a felony.
 
Back
Top Bottom