The murder of Ahmaud Arbery/All three perpetrators found guilty

Originally posted by dadudemon
English denied this.

Of course, phone records could easily prove or disprove that. But that's what English said. The McMichael's never said, that I know, that English contacted them. But they did talk about having a clear view of his property as they lived near his house.

Oh sure but having a clear view doesn't mean they saw every trespasser. I mean were these guys just camped out 24/7 watching his place? Did they not have lives of their own? Were they just totally dedicated to protecting their neighbors property 24/7?

Cuz see the key difference between the white trespassers and Arbery is *English specifically called them over Arbery*.

Originally posted by Surtur
Oh sure but having a clear view doesn't mean they saw every trespasser. I mean were these guys just camped out 24/7 watching his place? Did they not have lives of their own? Were they just totally dedicated to protecting their neighbors property 24/7?

Cuz see the key difference between the white trespassers and Arbery is *English specifically called them over Arbery*.

Wait a minute, where is this evidence?

English called them over it? Called the McMichaels?

But he denied this.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
According to English, the McMichaels were never alerted about trespassers. But that is irrelevant to the point. I was presenting a hypotethical argument that presumed the McMichaels had been alerted about trespassers as they claimed. That is their strongest position, that they had seen video evidence of the trespassers on English's property. Unfortunately for them, that sword cuts both ways, and they would have seen all of the trespassers.

But as I understand it they acted because English alerted them to a problem.

So you're correct someone did see whites and Arbery trespass and only acted on one of them, but that is English. He is the one who decided to be selective about who could creep around on his property.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
also, McMichaels had no right to chase down any of the trespassers since there was no probable cause of criminal intent.

but sit back and watch ddm gaslight the issue, trying to misrepresent it as a "home invasion" and "breaking in", claiming that there is proof that he was "casing the joint", and trying desperately to misrepresent Georgia's laws concerning criminal trespassing.

That is my second point, that the McMichaels are not judge, jury, and executioner. They have no right to pursue, arrest, or detain someone they suspect of a crime, let alone execute them. They are not defending their life, the life of someone else, or even their own property. They are completely in the wrong, no matter how you look at it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Wait a minute, where is this evidence?

English called them over it? Called the McMichaels?

But he denied this.

I had thought English called the McMichaels over Arbery.

Because Bash said it was English with the cameras, not the McMichaels.

Originally posted by Surtur
Oh sure but having a clear view doesn't mean they saw every trespasser. I mean were these guys just camped out 24/7 watching his place? Did they not have lives of their own? Were they just totally dedicated to protecting their neighbors property 24/7?

Cuz see the key difference between the white trespassers and Arbery is *English specifically called them over Arbery*.

If that were the case, then they would not be able to identify the black trespasser as Arbery specifically from the video.

So who had access to the cameras the McMichaels or English?

Originally posted by Surtur
But as I understand it they acted because English alerted them to a problem.

So you're correct someone did see whites and Arbery trespass and only acted on one of them, but that is English. He is the one who decided to be selective about who could creep around on his property.

Originally posted by Surtur
I had thought English called the McMichaels over Arbery.

Originally posted by Surtur
Because Bash said it was English with the cameras, not the McMichaels.

Originally posted by Surtur
So who had access to the cameras the McMichaels or English?

Again, English denied this.

So who had the cameras? Where did the video come from?

Originally posted by Surtur
So who had the cameras? Where did the video come from?

Let's not play new. English has video evidence of multiple tresspassers on his property—some white, some black. He does not believe the black trespasser on video is Arbery. He also denies that he alerted the McMichaels about the trespassers or shared the videos with them.

The person who recorded the murder of Arbrey is one of the perpetrators, and he has been arrested.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Let's not play new. English has video evidence of multiple tresspassers on his property—some white, some black. He does not believe the black trespasser on video is Arbery. He also denies that he alerted the McMichaels about the trespassers or shared the videos with them.

The person who recorded the murder of Arbrey is one of the perpetrators, and he has been arrested.

Okay so the McMichaels spotted Arbery and pursued. This is only racist if we know they've spotted white trespassers in the act and done nothing. Which we don't know.

And yes you're correct they shouldn't have pursued him.

Originally posted by dadudemon
According to the McMichael's and the original prosecutor, the McMichael's had firsthand knowledge of the burglary (the prosecutor's words) and were in lawful pursuit.

wrong again. it was actually the second prosecutor,

the second prosecutor assigned to the case, said in a letter the McMichaels were in their rights to pursue “a burglary suspect,” and justified in using “deadly force to protect himself” under Georgia law.

Yes, the second prosecutor, George E. Barnhill, who will likely be investigated for his obviously shady conduct in not shutting up and immediately recusing himself. "why?" you might ask?

The original prosecutor recused herself from the case because Gregory McMichael, who is a former police officer and investigator, worked in her office. The case was then given to Barnhill.

However, Barnhill recused himself once Arbery’s mother argued Barnhill was also employed in the same office where Georgry McMichael once worked when he was a police officer, the New York Times reports.

Lee Merrit said on The Clay Cane Show today (May 6) on SiriusXM Urban View, “I want to be clear about George Barnhill because I think he should be investigated for prosecutorial misconduct for this specific reason: his son and the shooter grew up together.”

just the good 'ol boys, never meanin no harm
beats all you ever saw, been in trouble with the law
since the day they was born

https://www.bet.com/news/national/2020/05/06/gbi-to-investigate-ahmaud-arbery-shooting.html
https://www.nytimes.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-shooting-georgia.html

totally non-biased prosecutor can be trusted. why would he have lie? to protect and cover up for a family friend and former colleague? naaah

So basically we have now clearly established:

-English told the McMichaels nothing, not about any trespasser of any skin color
-Nothing points to the McMichaels spotting any of the other trespassers caught on video by English

Does this mean the McMichaels would have pursued white people if they saw them? Who knows. We have no way to say at this point.

And then we still don't know why English would say he go robbed of $2500 in equipment if it never happened.

if you want to believe that McMichaels just happened to have been taking a shit while every single white trespasser was on the property which he was monitoring, so be it. fact is even though the notion is ridiculous, it is still cause for reasonable doubt of a hate crime, and probably why there was no hate crime charge.

however you will no doubt try to argue this as "proof of no racial bias", as I accused you of in the OJ thread (and you cried and accused me of putting words in your mouth)

doesn't matter anyway since McMichaels had no right to chase down a single one of them without probable cause (no reason to suspect criminal intent).

unless a mistrial happens, all 3 of those clowns are going to spend the rest of their lives polishing knobs and licking jelly off of buttholes

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
if you want to believe that McMichaels just happened to have been taking a shit while every single white trespasser was on the property which he was monitoring, so be it.

doesn't matter anyway since McMichaels had no right to chase down a single one of them without probable cause (no reason to suspect criminal intent).

unless a mistrial happens, all 3 of those clowns are going to spend the rest of their lives polishing knobs and licking jelly off of buttholes

So he was just sitting there looking at English's property all day? Were the dad and son each taking 12 hour shifts?

Do you know what English did for them to cause them to be so dedicated to monitoring his property?

Originally posted by Surtur
So he was just sitting there looking at English's property all day? Were the dad and son each taking 12 hour shifts?

Do you know what English did for them to cause them to be so dedicated to monitoring his property?

do you?

That question was made in jest because there is no way the McMichaels had utterly dedicated their lives to monitoring this dudes property.

And yes yes I know you didn't claim that, but they'd need to be quite dedicated in order to happen to spot every single trespasser.

Originally posted by Surtur
That question was made in jest because there is no way the McMichaels had utterly dedicated their lives to monitoring this dudes property.

And yes yes I know you didn't claim that, but they'd need to be quite dedicated in order to happen to spot every single trespasser.

yet they just happened to spot the black trespasser, which was a total coincidence (teehee)

you can stop moving the goal posts to racial bias any time you wish. it's already been covered:

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
if you want to believe that McMichaels just happened to have been taking a shit while every single white trespasser was on the property which he was monitoring, so be it. fact is even though the notion is ridiculous, it is still cause for reasonable doubt of a hate crime, and probably why there was no hate crime charge.

however you will no doubt try to argue this as "proof of no racial bias", as I accused you of in the OJ thread (and you cried and accused me of putting words in your mouth)