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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #961

Can't any single one of these peeps keep their stories straight?!

The 911 call transcript indicates TM never even got out of his truck on the 11th, at least, not to approach or confront the trespasser.

At night, 7:27pm in February, he saw a trespasser go into E's unfinished house, just beforehand reaching into his pocket, not a waistband. ("He looked like he was acting like he had a gun").

And TM stayed in his truck, (didn't go get GM?)
while "as many as 4 neighbors" searched for the trespasser.

Wonder who those 4 were.....
 
  • #962
I think you are right as to which man texted what but I snipped yours to focus on the above. I think if English doesn't know the McMichaels, or at least who they are, why wouldn't Perez add a descriptor rather than simply Travis in his sentence?

Example: I think he got spooked when another neighbor confronted him.

or

I think he got spooked when that Travis guy from down the way confronted him.

It's odd to me that Perez seems assume English knows who TM is in his texts

I can't see any implication of English's complicity in those texts. It's possible that Perez is just relaying the who, the what and the where, without going into explanations.
 
  • #963
Thank you
Your welcome! Look for post # 516 on P 26. A member posted the videos there, although I'm not sure it shows them all.
 
  • #964
Your welcome! Look for post # 516 on P 26. A member posted the videos there, although I'm not sure it shows them all.
Opinion - Those black and white shirtless videos look like Ahmaud Arbery to me........I want to see the missing video time from that house on the day of his death........Maybe in time we will.......moo
 
  • #965

Attachments

  • 5DC2E232-896E-46F4-B484-BDD5FD36BF68.jpeg
    5DC2E232-896E-46F4-B484-BDD5FD36BF68.jpeg
    84 KB · Views: 56
  • CE03CF19-BEF2-4E33-8F38-619B72B7C141.jpeg
    CE03CF19-BEF2-4E33-8F38-619B72B7C141.jpeg
    68.9 KB · Views: 50
  • BC51848D-61A7-4882-A251-7C5D3B265B1F.jpeg
    BC51848D-61A7-4882-A251-7C5D3B265B1F.jpeg
    55.7 KB · Views: 40
  • 710F8D1D-6202-4CAF-8EB9-4808F6D711F7.jpeg
    710F8D1D-6202-4CAF-8EB9-4808F6D711F7.jpeg
    59.6 KB · Views: 44
  • 3792156F-8D46-4901-9980-8C23F0C1D400.jpeg
    3792156F-8D46-4901-9980-8C23F0C1D400.jpeg
    65.7 KB · Views: 47
  • 9DC02050-FE2D-4DE3-B935-BBB6E1D1376F.jpeg
    9DC02050-FE2D-4DE3-B935-BBB6E1D1376F.jpeg
    45.8 KB · Views: 46
  • 3AAF9387-1EBF-4595-A85B-CF6A0741BE4C.jpeg
    3AAF9387-1EBF-4595-A85B-CF6A0741BE4C.jpeg
    63.8 KB · Views: 49
  • C3803902-15AD-4177-B20C-BC3D5424412E.jpeg
    C3803902-15AD-4177-B20C-BC3D5424412E.jpeg
    59.9 KB · Views: 47
  • C356D7E6-B432-4756-AFD9-FD4B858329BB.jpeg
    C356D7E6-B432-4756-AFD9-FD4B858329BB.jpeg
    43 KB · Views: 40
  • #966
When you consider the timeline of Feb 11, what is most probable is that the trespasser- who looks like AA, imo- went into the house to escape a threatening TM. And it was his going into the house that triggered the motion sensor which ultimately brought Perez onto the scene.

So...not one of those 3 fellows- not TM or GM or Perez got a good look at the trespasser that NIGHT, and only TM actually saw him at all.

Which also, when you toss in 4 neighbors then LE too
"searching" for the trespasser, largely if not completely shreds Perez's story that he might have seen the trespasser get into a car and be driven away.
 
  • #967

LE twice, including on Feb 11, explicitly noted that entry into/onto E's property was NOT a felony. (Changed initial assessment on Feb 11 from burglary to trespassing; on earlier call, from looking for a trespasser to simply putting an "extra watch" on E's property).

No. Felony.
 
  • #968
When you consider the timeline of Feb 11, what is most probable is that the trespasser- who looks like AA, imo- went into the house to escape a threatening TM. And it was his going into the house that triggered the motion sensor which ultimately brought Perez onto the scene.

So...not one of those 3 fellows- not TM or GM or Perez got a good look at the trespasser that NIGHT, and only TM actually saw him at all.

Which also, when you toss in 4 neighbors then LE too
"searching" for the trespasser, largely if not completely shreds Perez's story that he might have seen the trespasser get into a car and be driven away.


I think Perez was alerted by English because he got an alert on his phone someone was in the house. As he approached the house that's when he ran into Travis.
 
  • #969
Good points. ^^^

Well IMO , IF English knew who the McMichael's were before the murder... I'm betting he does not 'know' them anymore !

And if he didn't know them, why would he feel it necessary to lawyer up?

eta Sorry, if I am thinking of Roddy, not English.
 
Last edited:
  • #970

It's interesting to note that there is video that shows intruders, other than a suspected AA, of being in that house after dark. I wonder if that's why such a small amount of video shown is only of a black male.

It's also interesting that water mains were broken on Feb 23 but there is no video to show who did that.

So it appears that TM has a red pick up and the truck that followed AA was GM's truck, a white one.
 
Last edited:
  • #971
Does anyone know if it is standard protocol for LE or DA's office to deny access to video evidence to the family of a victim because the investigation is still open? Ahmaud's Mom says she was told this.
 
  • #972
I can't see any implication of English's complicity in those texts. It's possible that Perez is just relaying the who, the what and the where, without going into explanations.

Good point. I guess I could also wonder why, if LE was not familiar with who Travis was when mentioned by Perez, English didn't say "Who?"

But as mentioned in another post, it is entirely possible Perez assumed English knew who he was talking about and English simply didn't care enough to ask or didn't want to seem like he didn't know who the heck Perez was referring to.

I am not insinuating any sort of complicity from English. Just finding some of the confusing evolving information a bit difficult to wade through. But we see it play out in many cases. With instant news a lot of misinformation comes out and that is normal I guess. I'm just along for the ride as we learn more.
 
  • #973
  • #974
  • #975
  • #976
Didn’t the father and son report a handgun stolen from a pick up truck they owned parked outside their home? This just seems odd to me, especially if they were concerned about break-ins. Why leave a gun in a unprotected vehicle?
Someone with LE experience should know better...
In addition, it is a convenient detail considering they claimed the victim put his hands down his pants as if he was going to draw a gun in a previous confrontation. Its just too much of a coincidence to me and too convenient for the perps for me. If I were a more suspicious person I might come to all sorts of conclusions.
 
  • #977
If the McMichaels are guilty of felony murder, it looks to me like Bryant is guilty of something too.
I agree. But, the "what" part maybe hard to establish for a serious offense- or perhaps not.

Why? Unless the law has changed (which it very well may have), Bryant wouldn't have a duty to do anything and no law would prevent him from video'ing it.
In some accounts, Bryant apparently made an effort to cut AA before resorting to just following him (he might be re-casting his role from "secondary participant" to "horrified bystander").

If there was a prior agreement to confront the trespasser and 'B' joined in the effort to do so, he might be 'Party' to an offense.

'Party' to what maybe hard to establish though. I think the State might need to show that there was a prior agreement and that he knew or had very good reason to believe that a citizens arrest of sorts would be attempted and that the trespasser was going to be confronted with weapons.

Those elements might be hard to show. 'B' could state that he was "party" to a plan to simply have 'P' advise the trespasser that the owner was aware of him, that he was not welcome on the property and to "beat it".

Then again, if (key word) he tried to cut off AA..... . In the end, I just don't know what makes somebody 'party' to a particular offense.
 
Last edited:
  • #978
LE twice, including on Feb 11, explicitly noted that entry into/onto E's property was NOT a felony. (Changed initial assessment on Feb 11 from burglary to trespassing; on earlier call, from looking for a trespasser to simply putting an "extra watch" on E's property).

No. Felony.

Criminal trespassing statute in the State of Georgia, a sharp mod corrected me:

(a) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that ...
 
Last edited:
  • #979
  • #980
Felony trespassing statute in the State of Georgia:

(a) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that ...

It's not a felony. If you read further:

(d) A person who commits the offense of criminal trespass shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
80
Guests online
2,600
Total visitors
2,680

Forum statistics

Threads
632,163
Messages
18,622,937
Members
243,041
Latest member
sawyerteam
Back
Top