I agree with that. But I think they have plenty of supporters and are well-connected. They'll get as fair a trial as anyone who is accused of such a heinous crime would. That's always a concern with terrorism trials, because of what a chilling effect the crime has on the entire community. While these charges aren't terrorism, the effect of knowing these guys felt entitled to drive around and accost people with guns is chilling, IMO. And I really wish people, including the defendants, cared more about Mr. Arbery's rights.
My sense is that people do care about AA's rights and look at his death as the tragic situation that it is. I would say that most gun owners, myself included, think it was absolutely the wrong way to handle the situation. In fact, I'd say most of us question why they got involved at all, and are angry that they took weapons with them. Like it or not, and I don't, what one gun owner does reflects on all of us, no matter how many of us view the second amendment as a precious right that demands one act responsibly.
Where some of the divide seems to come in is:
-Some of us are concerned that all the facts may not be in.
-We're not certain that they got in the truck that day intending on killing anyone, and that they may very well not be the cold-blooded, premeditated killers they've been made out to be.
-We want to know all off the facts and influences leading up to AA's death.
-It matters to us what was their mindset and intent.
-We want to know more about Georgia law and how and does or does not apply to this case.
-We see <modsnip> leveraging this to THEIR greatest advantage and framing this in a way that fits their narrative.
-We see that some, in their rush to see the defendants pay, may gladly trample upon their constitutional rights, regardless of Georgia law or the frame of mind of the defendants at that time.
-We see that some are hell-bent on righting what has been framed a racially motivated crime, even though there may be no evidence of that.
So what do these dividing opinions and questions mean? They don't mean that we feel any less sympathy for AA and his loved ones. He should be alive today. We simply have questions and aren't comfortable getting old sparky ready just yet. All of the facts need to come in, and based on those facts alone the appropriate charge or charges should be filed. The cases must be tried in front of a jury of their peers who can be impartial and render a verdict based on consideration of facts only, not emotions. I don't see how that's even possible with this case.
Lastly, I was alarmed when I saw the video, and I'm equally alarmed by the street justice that's been called for on social media. There seems to be a near blood-lust like demand for vengeance. That should concern everyone.