GA - Ahmaud Arbery, 25, jogger, fatally shot by former PD and son, Brunswick, Feb 2020

[BeckyF]

Court TV did a story on this case this evening. All of the commentators said that they think this is a case where the victim was being stalked. 5/6/20 New Video of Ahmaud Arbery's Death Goes Viral - Court TV

I don't want to post a link to the video, as I'm sure many can find it themselves, but I really want to know why the person filming was filming, why they have no reaction and what is before and after in the video that has been released. My opinion only: it seems that person filming was aware of or involved in the vigilatism that day.

According to this the person who filmed was a friend of the McMichael's who helped them chase down and trap the victim. Video of Brunswick shooting made by one of victim's pursuers

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

Parents of unarmed black jogger, 25, shot and killed by two white men question why the 'vigilantes' haven't been arrested as LeBron James and Joe Biden lead calls demanding justice

Family of black jogger, 25, shot and killed by two white men demand justice | Daily Mail Online

 

[Satchie]

According to this the person who filmed was a friend of the McMichael's who helped them chase down and trap the victim. Video of Brunswick shooting made by one of victim's pursuers

RSBM

That makes sense to me, otherwise I was wondering why the video would have taken over 2 months to emerge. Normally, if it was just a random passer-by who happened to take the video, they would have sold the video to a news outlet right away.

 

[Bodhi]

So why has he not been named publicly?

I watched the video last night. I thought I heard 3 shots although I have read AA was shot twice. I can't rewatch it with sound bc my husband is asleep. Where there 3 shots? If so, do you know whether the son fired 3 times and hit Ahmaud twice? Or could the father or the 3rd attacker have fired once. Thank you.

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

From your above link Betty:

“Barnhill stepped down after Arbery’s family complained of a possible conflict of interest. His son worked in the Brunswick DA’s office and was acquainted with Greg McMichael.”

So, I wonder why the Arbery family had to complain before Barnhill recused himself. Why didn’t he do that in the first place?

 

[Bodhi]

Because you can't protect someone you want to protect if you recuse yourself.

He assumed or hoped the murder would be under the radar or passed off as justifiable without any investigation. <modsnip>

The corrupt system of justice that assumed the premeditated murder of a young black man could be casually sweep under the rug (and nearly succeeded) is an outrage. More than anything, I want America to live up to the creed equal justice under law. Officials who abuse power must be accountable for their actions. No one is above the law. <modsnip>

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

Because you can't protect someone you want to protect if you recuse yourself.

He assumed or hoped the murder would be under the radar or passed off as justifiable without any investigation. The death of this young man at the hands of white nationalists in broad daylight infuriates me.

The corrupt system of justice that assumed the premeditated murder of a young black man could be casually sweep under the rug (and nearly succeeded) is an outrage. More than anything, I want America to live up to the creed equal justice under law. Officials who abuse power must be accountable for their actions. No one is above the law. White nationalists included.

BBM - Got it, I just thought it would be obvious they had worked together, so why not just do it upfront.

I so agree with your sentiments.

 

[BeckyF]

Letter from DA who stepped down to Captain Tom Jump with Glynn County Police Dep't. He explains why he did not bring charges. The 3rd person's name is listed also (person who took the video).

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...-glyn/b52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf

 

[Cryptic]

Letter from DA who stepped down to Captain Tom Jump with Glynn County Police Dep't. He explains why he did not bring charges. The 3rd person's name is listed also (person who took the video).

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...-glyn/b52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf

The image of those two white men with their guns in hand, driving around in a pick up truck, looking for and chasing a black man, cutting him off.....

This letter and the circumstances are the worst of the old South legalism.

I don't doubt that the legal cites are accurate- burglary is a felony in Georgia and citizens arrests are permitted in regards to felonies.

The proposed application of the law, however, is olde Georgia. The three assailants, all white, are automatically presumed to be telling the truth. Their word alone is then used to apply the citizen's arrest concept and in the eyes of the DA, totally exonerate them.

Yet, apparently none of the men can articulate what the victim "burglarized" (obviously no direct knowledge as required by law).

Nor, can they articulate why they even thought he had burglarized something (other than to say that he resembled an unidentified individual who might have been a burglar).

Yet, the men are exonerated based on the "logic" of: Victim was a criminal because we declare him to be one. Our actions were legal because we say they were.... .

 

[Leve]

So why has he not been named publicly?

I watched the video last night. I thought I heard 3 shots although I have read AA was shot twice. I can't rewatch it with sound bc my husband is asleep. Where there 3 shots? If so, do you know whether the son fired 3 times and hit Ahmaud twice? Or could the father or the 3rd attacker have fired once. Thank you.

The first was thru his palm, then 2 more during the struggle. All were from the sons shotgun.

 

[Cubby]

This letter and the circumstances are the worst of the old South legalism.

I don't doubt that the legal cites are accurate- burglary is a felony in Georgia and citizens arrests are permitted in regards to felonies.

The proposed application of the law, however, is olde Georgia. The three assailants, all white, are automatically presumed to be telling the truth. Their word alone is then used to apply the citizen's arrest concept and in the eyes of the DA, totally exonerate them.

Yet, apparently none of the men can articulate what the victim "burglarized" (obviously no direct knowledge as required by law).

Nor, can they articulate why they even thought he had burglarized something (other than to say that he resembled an unidentified individual who might have been a burglar).

Yet, the men are exonerated based on the "logic" of: Victim was a criminal because we declare him to be one. Our actions were legal because we say they were.... .

I agree minus one thing. Until these laws are changed, I can't agree with the use of the words 'old south'. It's 2020 and it's still happening, so I have to consider it current.

This has to stop. I'm sick to my stomach for his mother. This young man was murdered simply due to his skin color.

I'm definitely going to catch up and follow this case. I briefly heard something this morning about a grand jury not necessary to charge them? Need to learn more about that.

 

[oviedo]

saw this on the morning shows -

Video appears to show Georgia man fatally shot while jogging

 

[oviedo]

Grand jury to consider Ahmaud Arbery case as video of fatal shooting surfaces

CBS covered it as well

 

[Bodhi]

This letter and the circumstances are the worst of the old South legalism.

I don't doubt that the legal cites are accurate- burglary is a felony in Georgia and citizens arrests are permitted in regards to felonies.

The proposed application of the law, however, is olde Georgia. The three assailants, all white, are automatically presumed to be telling the truth. Their word alone is then used to apply the citizen's arrest concept and in the eyes of the DA, totally exonerate them.

Yet, apparently none of the men can articulate what the victim "burglarized" (obviously no direct knowledge as required by law).

Nor, can they articulate why they even thought he had burglarized something (other than to say that he resembled an unidentified individual who might have been a burglar).

Yet, the men are exonerated based on the "logic" of: Victim was a criminal because we declare him to be one. Our actions were legal because we say they were.... .

Right on! I appreciate your insight on the crux of this. Things won't change until people recognize the Catch-22 and we, the people who believe in equal justice, are willing to get off the sidelines and push back. A free press and public outrage are working. Corrupt officials recused when the spotlight was put on their actions and the investigation will be revived via a grand jury.

 

[Bodhi]

BBM - Got it, I just thought it would be obvious they had worked together, so why not just do it upfront.

I so agree with your sentiments.

I got your that, Blondie! I realized it was a rhetorical question. The explanation for inaction (coverup) strains credulity. Corruption by public officials from covid response to self-dealing right in plain sight is much on my mind these days. My goal was to build on your post.

 

[TTF14]

Thank you for posting this. I started to do it yesterday and then got distracted and realized I never came back to it. This is one I'll be following for sure.

 

[Cubby]

<modsnip> We teach children how to stand up to bullies, we need to do something similar regarding these racist hate crimes. The penalties need to be stiffer, not just for the offender, but also for those who participate in the cover up.

 

[Baciagalupo]

This made the news in Germany. Why isn't there more outrage about this? This was basically a present day lynching. I'm so angry.
My friend is married to an Afro-American and they live in an affluent part of Atlanta, I'm afraid something like this might someday happen to him.

 

[Cryptic]

The penalties need to be stiffer, not just for the offender, but also for those who participate in the cover up.

I think you have a very valid point.

There are no penalties for this type of cover up in the United States.

Though there are laws stating that public officials cannot harm others (including society) via refusing to carry out their duties etc., these laws are very difficult to enforce because the burden of proof is so high.

In practice, it needs to be shown that the official has affirmed that he has all the information needed to make a decision, that he accepts are presented elements as facts, and that he still refuses to take action.

Cover ups such as this where the official states "based on the evidence you gave me", and then applies a wildly favorable "spin" to the claims of the suspects cannot usually be punished.

This made the news in Germany.

A poster on another forum also illustrated a key difference between US prosecutors and prosecutors from Germany, and German law influenced areas of Switzerland, Austria and perhaps even France.

Prosecutors in those areas must pursue criminal charges once they become aware of a violation. Meanwhile, prosecutors in the USA have a lot more discretion / flexibility.

Thus, US prosecutors have the ability not to uhmm........ "actively pursue" cases for a variety of reasons (sometimes very good reasons, other times very bad reasons). This can lead to cover ups of criminal conduct.

 

[Boxer]

Because you can't protect someone you want to protect if you recuse yourself.

He assumed or hoped the murder would be under the radar or passed off as justifiable without any investigation. The death of this young man at the hands of white nationalists in broad daylight infuriates me.

The corrupt system of justice that assumed the premeditated murder of a young black man could be casually sweep under the rug (and nearly succeeded) is an outrage. More than anything, I want America to live up to the creed equal justice under law. Officials who abuse power must be accountable for their actions. No one is above the law. White nationalists included.

Without the video, Arbery dies the assailants stay free and the case slips into the past.

The "robberies" only one police report of a prior robbery in the area, a handgun stolen from a car near the McMicheals.