Man Who Filmed Arbery Shooting and Shared the Video is Charged With Murder

Ahmaud Arbery Shooting

(Twitter via AP)

By Russ Bynum, AP

The Georgia man whose cellphone video of Ahmaud Arbery’s fatal shooting helped reignite the case has been charged with murder, making him the third person arrested more than two months after the slaying.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation said 50-year-old William “Roddie” Bryan Jr. was arrested Thursday on charges of felony murder and criminal attempt to commit false imprisonment. Agents later searched Bryan’s home, several TV stations reported. The GBI said in a statement that it would hold a news conference Friday morning.

Arbery was slain Feb. 23 when a white father and son armed themselves and pursued him after spotting the 25-year-old black man running in their neighborhood. More than two months passed before authorities arrested Gregory McMichael, 64, and his son, Travis McMichael, 34, on charges of felony murder and aggravated assault. Gregory McMichael told police he suspected Arbery was a burglar and that Arbery attacked his son before being shot.

Bryan lives in the same subdivision just outside the port city of Brunswick, and the video he took from the cab of his vehicle helped stir a national outcry when it leaked online May 5.

The video quickly drew a strong reaction from Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican who called it “absolutely horrific.” The Georgia Bureau of Investigation soon took over the case from local police, and the arrests of the McMichaels followed on May 7.

Under Georgia law, a person can be charged with felony murder for committing any felony that causes the death of someone else. It does not require intent to kill and carries an automatic life sentence.

In the Glynn County police incident report on the shooting, Gregory McMichael told an officer that at one point Arbery “began running back the direction from which he came and `Roddy’ attempted to block him which was unsuccessful.” It’s the only mention in the police report of any potential involvement by Bryan.

Bryan’s attorney, Kevin Gough, did not immediately return a phone message Thursday. He has previously insisted Bryan played no role in Arbery’s death.

“Roddie Bryan is not now, and has never been, more than a witness to the shooting,” Gough said in a statement on the case Monday. “He is not a vigilante. Roddie did not participate in the horrific killing of this young man. Mr. Bryan has committed no crime, and bears no criminal responsibility in the death of Ahmaud Arbery.”

Meanwhile, attorneys for Arbery’s parents cheered the news of Bryan’s arrest.

“We called for his arrest from the very beginning of this process,” attorneys S. Lee Merritt, Benjamin Crump and L. Chris Stewart said in a statement. “His involvement in the murder of Mr. Arbery was obvious to us, to many around the country and after their thorough investigation, it was clear to the GBI as well.”

Bryan’s video of the shooting was taken from the driver’s seat of a vehicle following Arbery as he runs along a residential street. A pickup truck is parked in the road ahead of Arbery, with one man in the truck’s bed and another standing beside the open driver’s side door.

The video shows Arbery run around the truck to the right before he cuts back in front of it. Then a gunshot can be heard, followed by a second shot. Arbery can be seen punching a man holding what appears to be a shotgun, who then fires a third shot point-blank. Arbery staggers and falls face down in the street.

Gregory McMichael retired last year after more than two decades as an investigator for the local prosecutor’s office. Because of those ties, Brunswick Judicial Circuit District Attorney Jackie Johnson recused herself from the case. Two outside prosecutors assigned the case have also stepped aside.

The McMichaels remain jailed in Glynn County waiting for a preliminary court hearing and for a judge to decide whether to free them on bond pending trial. Attorneys for the father and son have urged people not to rush to judgment in the case.

comments

  1. avatar Anon says:

    So…anyone recording a shooting is an accessory?

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      So you missed the part where McMichaels implicated Bryan?

      “In the Glynn County police incident report on the shooting, Gregory McMichael told an officer that at one point Arbery “began running back the direction from which he came and `Roddy’ attempted to block him which was unsuccessful.”

      Yep, Bryan was indeed a member of the runaway slave patrol, and now he gets a felony murder charge.

      Other than involving himself in the Lynch mob, his biggest mistake was in conspiring with McMichaels to produce an edited video which was then released to the press.

      The authorities searched his home in order to find the complete video and any relevant communications between the conspirators.

      They’ll be in prison for quite some time.

      1. avatar Joseph says:

        Don’t ya just love these people who rush to judgment!?

        1. avatar BLAMMO!! says:

          The time to jump to conclusions is now. If we wait for all the facts to come out, it will be too late.

        2. avatar Chief Censor says:

          Don’t you love people that assume there isn’t a huge pool of evidence to draw from? Those people that research should shut their mouths because everyone else is too lazy to do it themselves, thus will accuse others of jumping to “unfounded” conclusions.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          There have been people who jumped to conclusions, and a man is dead as a result.

        4. avatar Joseph says:

          Yep! One wrong conclusion to jump to was “I can wrestle that shotgun away from that guy and shoot his ass”!! DUUUUUHHHHHH!!!!!

      2. avatar ChoseDeath says:

        Runaway Slave Patrol 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Fuck that’s beautiful. You histrionic bastard, that’s wonderful. Thanks for the laugh, clowns should be funny 🤡🤡

      3. avatar Manse Jolly says:

        “….his biggest mistake was in…”

        Talking to the police without a lawyer present to represent him. Reports say that he thought he was just a witness when questioned. Yes, he was a witness against himself.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Well, looks like the Demokkkommies learned nothing from the Flynn debacle exploding in their face.

        2. avatar Miner49er says:

          What debacle with Flynn?

          Traitor took secret meetings with Russian ambassador, then lied about it under oath.

          Took $40,000 from Russian government TV, then lied about it, have you seen a picture of him having dinner with Putin along with Jill Stein? He was just a pawn of the Russian disinformation game.

          Then he confessed, in court, allocuted
          and signed documents detailing his corruption.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Except we now know that none of that is true.

        4. avatar B-Rad says:

          Did you miss something? You can read his plea and watch the video.
          https://youtu.be/4UYJIfn1VSY?t=2595
          https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          You mean the plea that was withdrawn on the charge that even the DOJ now admits was a perjury trap?

        6. avatar Chief Censor says:

          The lawyer tried hard to make him look like a poor dummy that happened to be there. He even got him to pass a lie detector test 24 hours before being arrested, they thought that would work. He argued that Roddy is the only witness, therefore, should be treated only as a witness. The lawyer got pissed after hearing that his client was arrested and was speaking without him present; he told the press he would block anyone that asks him questions at this point.

        7. avatar Dude says:

          “Traitor took secret meetings with Russian ambassador”
          Was he charged for this? No? Irrelevant. Besides, speaking to the ambassador was part of his job. Despite how the dems are portraying it, having a different opinion on foreign policy is NOT illegal.

          “then lied about it under oath.”
          We now know that the agents there didn’t think he lied at the time. Flynn and his attorneys were confidant he didn’t lie. He ended up signing the plea deal because the Office of Special Counsel leaked a threat to go after his son if he didn’t play ball with them. They were already bankrupting him. He didn’t want the same for his son.

          “Took $40,000 from Russian government TV, then lied about it, have you seen a picture of him having dinner with Putin along with Jill Stein?”
          Was he charged for this? Is this worse than the $500,000 that Bill Clinton accepted from the Russians when his wife was the Secretary of State and had influence over Russian sanctions that she ended up OPPOSING? Irrelevant again.

          “He was just a pawn of the Russian disinformation game.”
          You provided zero proof of this.

          The reason the media created all of this noise about Flynn, that you list, was so that it would look like he was a bad guy that had it coming. The propagandists are doing their job so weak minded fools won’t ask questions about someone’s civil rights being violated.

        8. avatar Miner49er says:

          “having a different opinion on foreign policy is NOT illegal.”

          Negotiating with a foreign power before your team is in office is a crime, and then lying about it to the VP and others is also a crime.

          “Bill Clinton accepted from the Russians”

          Clinton never concealed the speaking engagement fee, and never had dinner with Putin and concealed the contact with foreign officials.

          Regarding the plea deal, you talk about the FBI going after his son. One wonders just what sort of criminal enterprise his son was involved in to have legal liability exposure leading to FBI interest.

          If they are all innocent why not fight it out in court? There are plenty of billionaire Republican donors ready to foot the bill, that would just be pocket change for secretary of commerce Wilbur Ross who accumulated billions working for the Rothschilds in NYC.

      4. avatar Mister Fleas says:

        “Yep, Bryan was indeed a member of the runaway slave patrol…”

        The only “slave patrol” that operates in the 21st Century is when a minority is a Republican or conservative. Biden’s recent comment of “I’ll tell you what: If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black” displays that mentality.
        Other than involving himself in the Lynch mob,

      5. avatar Mister Fleas says:

        “Other than involving himself in the Lynch mob…”

        The only “Lynch mob” here are those demanding blood from the McMichaels and William Byran sans a trial.

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          So you don’t own a dictionary and haven’t been looking at the evidence in this case?

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Who said without a trial? Of course they’ll have a trial, then they’ll go to prison for life.

      6. avatar BlazinTheAmazin says:

        FACTS:

        There is ZERO video evidence of Arbery jogging anywhere in the neighborhood (with all the Ring/surveillance cameras these days that’s highly improbable).

        There is video evidence of Arbery entering this home numerous times prior so his “curiosity” over a home under construction should have already been satisfied.

        As soon as he sees the neighbor yell at him while on the phone he takes off at a SPRINT, not “jogging”.

        Arbery had both a juvenile as well as an adult criminal record including a weapons charge.

        Said weapons charge at the high school game involved Arbery running and trying to ditch the gun (not the actions of a legal CC’er who may be carrying in the wrong place).

        His probation violation in 2018 was for theft (so we know he likes to steal things).

        McMichaels was involved with Arbery’s earlier theft case and knew his criminal history (meaning he knew he could be armed too).

        Under Georgia law the house under construction is still considered a dwelling and entering a dwelling with the intention to commit theft is a FELONY (so there is REASONABLE suspicion by the neighbors a felony was taking place).

        Under Georgia law citizens are allowed to make citizen’s arrests (as well as the McMichaels having just as much right to be on a public road as anyone).

        The McMichaels asked Arbery to stop and wait for the police to arrive (obviously not a crime)

        If Arbery was “being chased by armed white supremacists” why continue running towards the truck? He could have cut left or right through the trees and houses to seek cover and is much more logical.

        No shots were fired until Arbery ATTACKED McMichaels. McMichaels has a right to defend himself.

        The wounds in the autopsy results are consistent with shots fired during a struggle (e.g. through the hand and another at an upward angle from inside of a foot).

        If there is more evidence then let it come out in court but based upon the totality of the circumstances it is pretty obvious to see why the McMichaels were not arrested at the time. Much like how George Zimmerman wasn’t arrested at the time and only after the blacks started to complain does the political machine start to turn and then an arrest is made. So in summation: don’t attack people with shotguns and your body is less likely to assume a room temperature.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          You can *hear* the shot which hit him in the hand, and it was before he reached the guy. IOW, your rendition is wrong. And all the supposed “evidence” you present is a good reason to report him to the police. What happened instead was murder. Arguably a lynching.

        2. avatar BlazinTheAmazin says:

          Swing and a miss Larry. Autopsies can actually show an approximate distance from the muzzle via the amount of gunpowder/residue in the wounds themselves. All wounds were sustained inside of 2 feet therefore not until Arbery ATTACKED McMichaels.

    2. avatar Ron says:

      I can’t remember the exact law, but it may be similar to last year when there was that big gang rape on the beach during spring break, and someone filmed it and posted it online. If I remember correctly, the people committing the rape were obviously charged but I believe the person recording was as well.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Yes there’s much more. Not only was he an accomplice during the commission of the unlawful detainment and murder, he and McMichael concealed the existence of the video tape for two months before releasing it.

        I am sure the investigating officers asked if there was any video of the incident, both McMichael and Bryan lied and said no, providing false information to the police officer is obstruction of justice in the furtherance of a felony.

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Wait a minute and Serge is going to chime in and tell us that it isn’t a crime to forget about a video in Georgia.

        2. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

          “I am sure” is speculation, not evidence. Were they ever asked about any video? If so, what did they say? Unless there’s some law compelling citizens to produce evidence upon request by a LEO, there’s no basis for assuming that they lied about anything (if they were even asked).

        3. avatar BusyBeef says:

          Where’d you go to law school again Serge? Oh right. You didn’t.

          Read some case law (oh wait, you’re not a lawyer and don’t have access to current cases and shepardizing whether they’re good or bad law).

          It’s not just physical restraint – it’s the reasonable belief that you are not free to leave. Being held at gunpoint is sufficient to form the reasonable belief.

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          1. Assumes facts not in evidence.
          2. Please cite the relevant case law… I’ll wait.
          3. Just because I’m not a practicing attorney doesn’t mean I have no training in the law. HINT: There are plenty of people with post-graduate degrees who don’t work in the field of their post-graduate degrees

        5. avatar Joseph says:

          Hey Beef, take another bite outta that Big Mack and watch the video again.

          “Being held at gunpoint…”——where in it do you see the shotgun being POINTED at the “jogger”???

          I’ll be waiting.

        6. avatar Learned Hand says:

          So are you a lawyer or not pwserge?

        7. avatar Joseph says:

          You don’t have to be a lawyer to have an opinion. Just some opinions are made with more knowledge than others. Every LAWYER has an opinion and they are usually never in agreement.
          That’s why the ONLY opinion that matters is a jury’s after they weigh ALL of the evidence. And so far NOBODY in this conversation has that.

        8. avatar Chief Censor says:

          I read that Roddy played the video for a responding officer (most likely Rash). I think there was one black officer there that wanted to arrest, but the DA blocked them.

          Alan Tucker got the video from Greg, who got the video from Roddy, so they could “leak” it to a local radio station to clear the white men before a race riot occurred in Greg’s neighborhood. They conspired to write the narrative, which is why there is now a separate investigation into the government.

          I would not be surprised if Alan Tucker gets in trouble too. Same with officer Rash, Diego Perez and Larry English. They all have been lying and aiding the murderers before and after.

        9. avatar Chief Censor says:

          @Joseph

          We have known for over a week that Travis pointed the shotgun at Arbery before Arbery attacked Travis. It’s on the damn video! Shit! Open your eyes. It’s literally on the damn video you watched (I assume you watched).

    3. avatar Joseph says:

      There is MORE to it than just the filming.

      1. avatar napresto says:

        For sure there’s more going on in this case than has been released publicly. We’re all raging in the comments and choosing sides, but mostly we’re being manipulated by the lawyers who are releasing videos and snippets of information in order to shape the coming legal battlefield through public opinion.

        That said, it doesn’t look to good for these three who have been arrested. Chasing a guy down and threatening him with a firearm when he hasn’t acted violently and it isn’t even certain that he’s committed any kind of crime is just really, really stupid. Call the real, actual cops, report that there’s a suspicious person in the neighborhood, and save yourself a lot of jail time. Guns are a last resort for when your life is in mortal peril, not to get back some missing plywood and nails (if they’re even missing at all).

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          The media hasn’t put out the 911 calls from Larry English. He admitted to calling police in the past but not to filing reports. He sounded like he suspected white people of stealing his fishing stuff and his security cameras. He also reported a black male (with tattoos) looking through his boat and house with what appeared to be intent to steal.

          However, Larry went on national TV to say he never had anything stolen nor had any contact with the McMichaels. That appears to all be a lie. I suspected him of lying, now it appears that has been confirmed. That is not a shocker. Why else would he need a lawyer present to do an interview? Why else would he do a media tour and slowly release “newly found” evidence?

          Larry English is not the man you know from TV. He is trying to build a different character. He is not some innocent person who doesn’t understand technology. He isn’t the man who wouldn’t want people running around defending his new property. The dude followed people he suspected on his own, but he didn’t get out of his car to confront them, Greg went down there to do it for him.

      2. avatar Chief Censor says:

        They cut him off after 4 minutes of chasing him up and down the road. Travis gets out points the gun at Arbery. Greg yells at Travis to put it down and to stop it. Travis runs around the truck to intercept Arbery using his shotgun. Arbery then decided he can’t outrun a bullet and rushes Travis for the gun. Travis intentionally shoots Arbery 3 times and walk off like he is some kind of badass. Greg runs to the dying Arbery and searches his body for a gun.

        Here is the evidence the McMichael defenders refuse to see.

        1. avatar Joseph says:

          “Travis gets out points the gun at Arbery”—I never saw him POINT the gun at the “jogger”.
          And the “jogger” ran around the truck in order to attack Travis. That is plain as day in the video.

      3. avatar Chief Censor says:

        @Joseph

        Watch the video I linked. The man shows you clear as day what Travis did.

        By the way, I hear after Travis murdered the black man, he started destroying his social media and incriminating hate crime content on his computer.

        If the GBI wants to find out the truth, they can go to the internet companies to get the backups of his page. They could also recover deleted files on his computer if he didn’t go as far as Hillary Clinton to get rid of it.

    4. avatar Chief Censor says:

      According to Greg McMichael, Roddy helped block Arbery from escaping using his truck. The video uploaded was cut.

      I figured the entire community actually created a vigilante group to watch over the construction site, that has been confirmed. Not sure if they only focused on black people. This is where the neighborhood posted pictures of Arbery’s dead body. There are reports others on that private group said they would kill suspected criminals if they come into their community.

      I have seen evidence that proves Larry English is lying. He was part of this illegal vigilante group, who premeditated what is now a murder, essentially conspiracy to commit. He suspected white people of stealing his fishing stuff and his security cameras, he reported them walking into the house with a bag. He followed people to the bridge and sat in his car watching them. At one point Greg went down to that bridge to have “a little chat” with a homeless man and accuse him of stealing. Larry had communications with officer Rash, officer Rash had told Larry to just contact Greg to get stuff done. So far I have not seen evidence that Larry did contact Greg. Larry reported a black male with tattoos locking through his boat and property, he said that tattooed male was also caught on neighbors cameras looking around on their property.

      Apparently, this entire community didn’t want black people in their neighborhood because they suspected them of stealing. They may have put more effort on watching out for black people than the white people whom might have stolen the fishing stuff and cameras. Those white people could have been stealing for drug money. The black man with tattoos looks very shady and appeared to have intent to steal, he also looks like a person that would steal a gun for his personal use.

      This is all premeditated by the community. There are more people involved with this crime. Diego Perez and Larry English were in on it and have pretended they are completely innocent. Those men don’t understand how technology works. There are records you cannot delete, it’s up to the government to look into it.

      Larry English can be arrested for conspiracy, obstruction, interfering, etc. Wait until the public sees the evidence for those charges, they will call for his arrest too. The GBI said they might make more arrests.

    5. avatar Xaun Loc says:

      So you would have us believe that he just happened to be stopped in the middle of the wrong side of the road making a cell phone video of a random jogger when suddenly and completely by surprise all this happened in front of him.

      If anyone buys that story, I’ve got a very nice bridge in Brooklyn that I’d be willing to sell at a good price.

    6. avatar Hannibal says:

      Did you get the first comment because you didn’t actually read anything beyond the title?

  2. avatar Ron says:

    Well this aught to be a pleasant discord.

    1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

      You know it.

  3. avatar Sulla says:

    Can’t wait to hear how this guy is obviously a murdererracist and deserves to be killed because he hunted down the innocent jogger, too.

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      Yes, he is a murderer and I’m guessing, a racist as well.

      “In the Glynn County police incident report on the shooting, Gregory McMichael told an officer that at one point Arbery “began running back the direction from which he came and `Roddy’ attempted to block him which was unsuccessful.”

      1. avatar Ron says:

        Yeah but you have to realize you calling someone racist doesn’t have any weight. Wether they are one or not.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          True dat. That ship has sailed, most obvious racist in the last couple decades is Barack Obama. Nobody cares anymore.

      2. avatar Dude says:

        “attempted to block him which was unsuccessful”
        How does that equal murder? Maybe we don’t know everything about this case. They also just searched McMichael’s house. That might be related.

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          It makes him a team player.

        2. avatar tdiinva says:

          Felony murder is what you get charged with when you participate in a felony that results in death. That includes cases where your partner in crime dies at the hand of the intended victim.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Nothing they are being accused of is a felony.

        4. avatar Miner49er says:

          Yes, did you miss the murder charge?

          Both McMichaels were charged with murder, and now Bryan.

          Sergei, with your vast knowledge of Georgia code, do you seriously believe murder is not a felony in the state of Georgia? Or do you believe that murder of a black person is not a felony in the state of Georgia?

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          They are being charged with FELONY murder. FELONY murder requires an underlying felony. It’s the only way they can get away with not presenting evidence of intent, which they do not have.

        6. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Hey everyone! Serge and Miner are gettin’ into a tiff!

          (grabs popcorn, eases into the recliner chair, puts feet up…)

        7. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Climbing out of truck with a loaded shotgun in your hands as opposed to being cased, in a scabbard, or carried by a sling, chambering a round, flicking the safety to the fire position, pointing it at somebody, putting your finger inside the trigger guard on the trigger and pulling twice is pretty much all the evidence they are going to need to prove intent.

        8. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yeah, not unless everything you just said was justified by the fact that they were in hot pursuit of a fleeing felon.

        9. avatar Huntmaster says:

          All they need now is a badge.

        10. avatar pwrserge says:

          Fortunately for them, in Georgia, they don’t need a badge. You can disagree that the statute is too broad, but it is what it is.

        11. avatar Huntmaster says:

          For what they did, you do need a badge. That’s why they are sitting in a jail right now. And that’s why they will soon be filling out permanent change of address cards at the post office.

        12. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

          “they were in hot pursuit of a fleeing felon”

          I’ll ask a 3rd time, where’s your source for the felony conviction(s) you claim?

        13. avatar pwrserge says:

          So… Serpent… You’re going to keep denying the basic facts of the case?

          The scumbag in question has two prior convictions.

          One for bringing a concealed weapon to a football game at a high school. (Then running and trying to ditch the gun when confronted.)
          One for stealing a TV while on probation for the earlier incident. (Which was pled down to “shoplifting” despite the fact that the sticker price of the TV in question was almost certainly above the $300 maximum for “shoplifting” under GA statute.)

          If you aren’t willing to discuss this from the basis of things everyone knows to be true, your arguments aren’t made in good faith.

          Let me repeat myself for those with severe ADD. The only matter of fact for a jury in this case is wether there was reasonable and probable suspicion of a felony to justify the citizen’s arrest. That’s it. If the justification was there, everything that happened was lawful. It doesn’t matter if you wouldn’t do it. It doesn’t matter if you don’t agree that the statute should exist. Those are not legal arguments.

          We can have a MORAL debate as to the events involved, but I prefer to avoid Monday morning moral quarterbacking. I wasn’t there. I don’t know the full history. I can’t judge the decisions of other people when I don’t know what they knew at the time.

          The LEGAL debate is simple. Was there enough cause to justify a citizen’s arrest. I would be tempted to say yes, or at least say that there is not enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there was not.

        14. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

          “If you aren’t willing to discuss this from the basis of things everyone knows to be true” – If everyone knows them to be true, shouldn’t be hard to point out a source that confirms it. In my searching, i can see that he was charged with bringing a gun to school and shoplifting. Have yet to see where he was convicted of either. If you have the links, that will be more convincing than your claim that he was convicted.

          On another thread, you claimed it was illegal for him to have a handgun at age 19, which is simply not true, so despite your self-proclaimed genius and legal experience, I don’t find you a particularly credible source.

        15. avatar LarryinTX says:

          They are accused of murder. I’m pretty sure that’s a felony.

        16. avatar DDay says:

          pwrserge says:
          May 22, 2020 at 08:45
          They are being charged with FELONY murder. FELONY murder requires an underlying felony. It’s the only way they can get away with not presenting evidence of intent, which they do not have.

          Hey dummy, the mcmichaels are being charged with murder, not felony murder. roddie is charged with felony murder because he’s also charged with attempted false imprisonment which is a felony.

        17. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

          “If you aren’t willing to discuss this from the basis of things everyone knows to be true, your arguments aren’t made in good faith.”

          Absent any substantive reply, let’s look at what everyone knows to be true. As reported by AJC

          “When he was in high school, Arbery was sentenced to five years probation as a first offender on charges of carrying a weapon on campus and several counts of obstructing a law enforcement officer. He was convicted of probation violation in 2018 after he was charged with shoplifting, court documents show.”

          Looking at what may be less well known (but was perhaps within PwrSerge’s claimed encyclopedic legal knowledge?) about GA’s first-time offender law:

          “The first offender is not considered a convicted felon. During probation and/or confinement, the GCIC record contains “First Offender Act” remarks. The first offender’s exoneration of guilt and discharge shall not affect any of his civil rights and liberties. Thus, the offender has the right to vote and bear arms because he has no criminal conviction on record.”

          https://bixonlaw.com/georgias-first-offender-act-information-and-updates/

          So, still not seeing where there’s a felony conviction here, let alone the two felony convictions that would have put him away for life under a 3-strikes law (as PwrSerge has asserted elsewhere). At best, we’ve got one possible felony for his later probation violation/shoplifting, but even that remains an unsupported premise on the record we’ve got here.

        18. avatar pwrserge says:

          Go take a look at fist offender statutes… When homeboy couldn’t keep his hands off of other people’s shit and violated parole, he lost his “first offender” status.

        19. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

          Still not seeing the conviction on the 2nd offense, or where the gun in the school was a felony.
          Feel free to post a link instead of the lazy instruction to “look it up”.

      3. avatar Chris Mallory says:

        The only people on this earth who are not racists are idiots afraid of being called names by communists. Race is family and only a fool puts another before his family.

        1. avatar SwampDaddy says:

          I raise my glass to you!!

        2. avatar jwm says:

          Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy may be a part of your family, but they ain’t part of mine.

  4. avatar John Galt says:

    So………. if whites kill a black it’s racist murder and national news before, during and after the trial. When blacks kill whites it’s business as usual…..nothing to see here, don’t mention race, cut the sentence 75% and let them out to do it again.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      You left out the largest group, when black kills black, nobody cares enough to investigate.

    2. avatar strych9 says:

      I don’t know where this narrative comes from.

      Black men convicted of murdering whites have a significantly higher chance of getting the death penalty than do whites that kill blacks. Something like 241% off the baseline.

      This has been studied pretty extensively since the reinstatement of the death penalty post Furman since arbitrary imposition of the penalty was the crux of that case.

  5. avatar Huntmaster says:

    In my neighborhood when you want to talk with somebody, it’s customary to leave your pistol in it’s holster and the shotgun in the truck. If you don’t feet comfortable with that it’s probably better to leave that conversation up to the police. If these boys had followed that advice they wouldn’t be in jail and Arbery wouldn’t be in the ground

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      In my neighborhood it’s customary not to go into other people’s property without permission.

      1. avatar Ron says:

        I actually appreciate your extreme nature, but for real, do you have some kind of alert set up on your phone to where anything posted about this case notifies you?

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Check the box at the end of the comments.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I thought that box didn’t work any more.

      2. avatar Huntmaster says:

        Serge, you’re really gonna have to do better than that.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Not really. Convicted felon went into a house looking to steal something. Convicted felon got caught and ran. Convicted felon resisted arrest. Convicted felon got shot. World a better place, news at 11.

        2. avatar DaveL says:

          When was he convicted of a felony?

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          When he brought a handgun to a football game at a high school where he wasn’t a student.

        4. avatar Miner49er says:

          “When he brought a handgun to a football game at a high school where he wasn’t a student.”

          Yes, under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights he exercised his right to keep and bear arms at a public sporting event.

          95% of the people posting on this site believe that should not be a crime.

          So we can dismiss that felony conviction as just more evidence of government overreach and a loss of constitutionally protected liberties, right?

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          The law is the law. Don’t like it? Well, sucks to be you.

        6. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

          Reports say he was indicted for it; show the conviction.

          Show the law where having a gun on school property is a felony.

        7. avatar LarryinTX says:

          He was convicted at a football game? I doubt that, and given that as your only response, I believe he was never convicted of any felony, your (bullshit) case just went up in smoke, they’re going to hang.

        8. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

          He was sentanced to probation as a “first offender” for the gun at school. Under GA law “The first offender is not considered a convicted felon.”

          https://bixonlaw.com/georgias-first-offender-act-information-and-updates/

        9. avatar pwrserge says:

          Somebody needs a calendar. The act you linked was passed in 2015 and enforced in 2016. The basketball game the felon in question was arrested at took place in 2013. So unless you’re claiming time travel was involved…

        10. avatar pwrserge says:

          But here’s the best part… when he violated probation by stealing that TV, he lost any “first offender” protections he might have had and became a felon.

          So you’re wrong on TWO parts of your own argument. People REALLY need to read their own damn sources.

        11. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

          Still waiting for support for the alleged felony.

          Time travel, indeed. Read the link yourself. “Georgia’s First Offenders Act was originally enacted in 1968

        12. avatar Miner49er says:

          Serpent, you must be wrong, Sergei knows Georgia law better than anyone!

          Your post is more fake news, many people are saying the victim was really attacking the McMichaels. They had to flee to their pick up truck in order to escape his barehanded assault.

          “Georgia’s First Offenders Act was originally enacted in 1968. It is known as Georgia’s “second chance law” because it gives first offenders a chance to learn from their mistakes and move on with their lives without criminal conviction records affecting their lives and careers.”

      3. avatar tdiinva says:

        I nominate Serge as most likely to be shot by and undercover cop when he attempts to make a citizens arrest.

        1. avatar Miner49er says:

          You would shoot him just based on your suspicion he had committed a crime?

        2. avatar tdiinva says:

          Serge, you would shoot an undercover cop?

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          If he didn’t present himself as a cop and was in the process of attacking me? Sure. Why wouldn’t I? I’m smart, not prescient.

        4. avatar DDay says:

          I love how serge is defending gun free zones. What a government bootlicker

        5. avatar tdiinva says:

          If you tried to “arrest” an undercover cop you could be charged with interfering with a police officer in performance of his duties even if he was acting in a way to maintain his cover. If you killed him you would be treated like any other cop killer.

    2. avatar Joseph says:

      Well, Hunt, I might just have my weapon IN HAND if I had prior knowledge of the person I was going to talk to was KNOWN to CARRY, a felon, known to be aggressive, NOT from the neighborhood and just felony trespassed.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Felony burglary, but close enough.

      2. avatar Huntmaster says:

        If you were aware of those facts and you still confronted the individual, unnecessarily, your self defense claim kind of goes away.

        1. avatar Joseph says:

          “unnecessarily”—–is an opinion !!!

          We the People are the LAW and entitled to enforce the law. We merely delegate that AUTHORITY to LEOS as a matter of convenience.

          WE NEVER RELINGUIST THAT AUTHORITY.

          Just as LEOS have to, we too still have to answer for our actions and had BETTER BE RIGHT when we take action!!!
          A jury of our peers will be the FINAL ENFORCERS of the law as ALWAYS!

      3. avatar Chief Censor says:

        I advise you not to brandish you weapon and unlawfully detain people. They will have the right to shoot you dead. There is no firearms organization that teaches you to do what you are saying you would do. There are videos of gun in hand white men getting shot because they thought they were confronting criminals when it turned out to be a cop.

        Heck, a white man was charged and convicted when he took out his handgun to threaten a mob of protesters he believed were going to beat him up. The cops arrested him on the spot.

        Someone like you needs to leave justice up to the professionals. Only use your gun in a life or death situatoin that you did not create yourself.

        1. avatar Joseph says:

          I’ll take my chances as to who gets the drop on who, thank you very much.
          Having my weapon IN HAND does not mean I am waving a long-gun in the air or pointing it at anybody, DUUUUUHHHHH( I really love you conclusion jumpers), just AT THE READY——-IN HAND—–IN POCKET——-IN HOLSTER——IN VEHICLE. I advise my wife to have her weapon IN HAND in her purse when in a potentially dangerous place. What do you tell yours? WAIT and hope to be able to get to it in a hurry??? DUUUUUHHHH!!

  6. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

    Oh here we go. Another 400 comments with 200 by one guy.

    1. avatar John A. Smith says:

      Yeah, he’s really managed to derail a lot of discussions. I’m kind of surprised the admins haven’t bounced him, because that behavior has turned the comments into a trash pit. Such a waste; used to be a good place to discuss.

      1. avatar Mike V says:

        Comment sections are usually a trash heap, dumpster fire, etc…

        So the guy is insistent and persistent, if the prevailing thought in these comments weren’t 90% against those dudes maybe he wouldn’t feel the need to be ever present.

        All things are yet possible in this case. Nothing is locked down, would it shock anyone if they went to a jury trial and are declared not guilty?

        1. avatar Mister Fleas says:

          “All things are yet possible in this case. Nothing is locked down, would it shock anyone if they went to a jury trial and are declared not guilty?”

          Yes, it would shock some people. There are people who believe George Zimmerman stalked and murdered Trayvon Martin, in spite of the criminal trial that exonerated him. There are people who believe in 2019 the Covington kids surrounded, threatened, and shouted racial epithets at a poor old Indian man, in spite of the whole thing being on video and exonerating the kids. Some people believe Michael “Gentle Giant” Brown was murdered in spite of the fact a grand jury, looking at all the evidence, failed to indict him.

          By the way, while I have defended the McMichaels’ here, that does not mean I am sure of their innocence.

        2. avatar Joseph says:

          Rushing to judgment is only done by the STUPIDS of this world.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          And, those who then chase down and murder the person they passed judgement on will have a lifetime to consider their stupidity.

        4. avatar Joseph says:

          It is my firm belief that the McMichaels would have NEVER shot this guy if he did not ATTACK and grab for that weapon.

          They would have shot him a lot sooner if that was what their INTENDED goal was. And that fact will be highly played up at their trial.

  7. avatar anarchyst says:

    Arbery was not being chased, could have walked in any direction he chose, and could have avoided the white men and the situation entirely.

    Arbery has that one fatal “flaw” that is present in all black DNA, the misperceived “shame” of being “disrespected” (even if no “disrespect” occurred) and the need to immediately “do something about it”.

    Arbery attacked a man with a firearm, never a “good idea”. His actions resulted in his own demise.

    Arbery got a well-deserved “dirt nap” and will not be casing houses or furthering his criminal enterprise anymore.

    Advice to Arbery and Trayvon types:

    “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes”.

    Kudos to the two white men who “took out the garbage”.

    1. avatar Not Impressed By Trolls says:

      I’ve said it before, but if you want to troll a flame war you need to be more subtle. Also, read a book and learn how quotation marks are supposed to be used.

    2. avatar Miner49er says:

      Yes, the victim did try to walk away, he had him to do exercise his freedom of assembly and not approach any of the conspirators but Bryan did his best to block his escape:

      “Gregory McMichael told an officer that at one point Arbery “began running back the direction from which he came and `Roddy’ attempted to block him which was unsuccessful.”

      1. avatar Joseph says:

        Bryan FAILED to block his escape. So why didn’t he continue his escape?!

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          He did, and two trucks continued to block him and box him in. *TWO* trucks. This went on for a while. Demonstrating clear intent.

        2. avatar Joseph says:

          Ah, the “jogger” quite nicely and easily WENT AROUND the trucks and could have continued on his merry jog.

          But NOPE, he chose to ATTACK instead of taking off. His bad!

        3. avatar Miner49er says:

          The victim realized that while he could run around the truck, there was no way he was going to outrun the shotgun.

          I was always taught, ‘assault into the ambush’.

          The victim thought he had one last chance to prevent the man with a shotgun from gunning him down. Travis could’ve left the shotgun laying on the seat, he had overwatch cover from his dad standing in the back of the pick up truck.
          But Travis wanted to be Barney badass and wave the 12 gauge at the black boy. He figured the black boy was just as much of a coward like Travis and would cower in fear when the gun came out but instead the victim took his only shot at preventing his death.

    3. avatar Mike V says:

      “Arbery was not being chased, could have walked in any direction he chose, and could have avoided the white men and the situation entirely.”

      So you where there?

      You know this with certainty how?

      1. avatar Joseph says:

        Instead of running around the pickup, as he did, and continue on his jog he chose to ATTACK !!!???

        1. avatar Mike V says:

          You’re taking a snapshot. There isn’t enough context.
          You may be right you may be wrong, but you don’t have a way to know with certainty either way.

        2. avatar Dude says:

          Disregarding everything else, it was possible to turn right instead of left after rounding the pickup. Nothing was blocking the way. The video shows this.

        3. avatar Mike V says:

          Dude, that’s the problem. You can’t disregard everything else, we don’t even know what the everything else was as all parties involved understood them to be, and it would all be critical info to make a good judgement.

        4. avatar Joseph says:

          That’s exactly why we have the INNOCENT until proven guilty presumption in our legal system.
          I have yet to hear or see any proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the “jogger” was intentionally shot by Travis.
          One can easily get himself shot while struggling for a gun. It could have very easily gone the other way.

        5. avatar strych9 says:

          While this is possible it’s not an iron clad defense.

          Depending on what happened prior to the video Aubrey may have felt that “jogging on” was going to get him shot in the back.

          You don’t always need a physical corner to push someone into.

        6. avatar Joseph says:

          ALL SPECULATION.

          But why wasn’t he shot in the front upon his approach to the truck?
          That should have been a good indication to him that he was NOT GOING TO BE SHOT, no?!

        7. avatar strych9 says:

          If a guy breaks into your house with a gun are you required to assume he’s not going to shoot you because he hasn’t yet shot you? No, obviously you’re not and you’d be a moron if you did make that assumption under those circumstances.

          Stop letting your emotions overrun your brain. It’s quite obvious that what led up to this, the exact details of which we don’t know, colored the actions of everyone involved. How exactly that works we don’t know. Looks like it’s going to be up to a jury to decide.

          At this point there is no reason to suspect that the dead guy didn’t have decent reason to believe that he was about to be shot in the back if he ran, knowing he had a 0% chance of outrunning slugs or buck he took the option to attack because he reckoned that gave him a chance of survival above 0%.

          As I said here before, if that fucktard raised that shotgun at me and then let me lope around the truck like that I’d have been coming around the front end of the truck with a gun up and punching holes in his fat ass. At that point I’m likely going to assume that until I’m outside the reasonable range of slugs, that he’s a lethal threat to me.

    4. avatar DDay says:

      The mcmichaels told the cops they were chasing arbery and roddie assisted in trying to block him.

      If you want to comment, don’t lie. The father and son say they were chasing him yet you deny that.

      Also people need to remember, there are at least several other witnesses who saw what happened. These charges are not based on only these 3’s statements and the video, there are independent witnesses

  8. avatar pwrserge says:

    Sounds like the DA is getting desperate to pin something on someone and make them perjure themselves. But I guess a mob of racists threatening to riot if they don’t get their pound of flesh will do that to a man.

    1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      Esoteric Inanity is admittedly confused by the plethora of comments posted by user pwrserge. Whereas many others who engage in the The Truth About Guns forum seem to confine their remarks to the limits of normal human conversation, the user pwrserge displays a considerable excess of observations and defensive retorts. Esoteric Inanity is beginning to share in the belief that pwrserge resides in a dark dwelling somewhere and spends perhaps too much time patrolling this forum.

      Esoteric Inanity asks himself: Is pwrserge receiving financial compensation from a benefactor intent on stirring up the waters?

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Nah, I just happen to have a lot of free time about now. Thanks China.

        1. avatar SKP5885 says:

          I’m sorry you lost your job. I am pretty sure the restaurants will reopen soon and your hostess job will be waiting for you.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Oh, I still have my job, I just happen to be a lot less busy.

    2. avatar Joseph says:

      Beginning to look that way.

  9. avatar Cannot Comply says:

    “Attorneys for the father and son have urged people not to rush to judgment in the case.”

    Not exactly a resounding “our clients are innocent and we will prove so in court.” Doesn’t seem like they have much confidence in their case.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      It’s a resounding “quit being retarded”. There is no case here.

      1. avatar Not Impressed By Trolls says:

        Does anyone know how to properly use quotation marks? Good lord. The punctuation goes inside the quote.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          The punctuation goes inside the quotes when its a part of the quote.

        2. avatar Ron says:

          Not around here, damnit! *spits*

          You just take that fancy learnin of yours back to TFB, boy!

          I typed that with a dip in.

        3. avatar Not Impressed By Trolls says:

          Well, just learned pwrserge is either quite old ( before the punctuation inside quotations at all times became standardized at the college level) or he’s not educated in America (certain schools of English like British English have a more subjective rule for quotes). Finally learned something about the man behind the mask.

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          You learned something I have stated dozens of times… Congratulations.

          Did you miss the part where English is my fourth language?

        5. avatar Not Impressed By Trolls says:

          My apologies sir, I was unfamiliar with your backstory. You see, I did not set out upon a quest to read every one of your posts on this site. As a result I’m forced to play catch up. I’m but a humble communist wishing to see the poetic art of trolling upheld with dignity poise, and proper grammar. You, as a troll, have recently become a bit of a muse to me, and I merely desire to aid in refining your already sharp technique.

        6. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Serge’s four languages: For anyone missing it, we know you’ll remind us again tomorrow. You do remind us almost daily.

        7. avatar pwrserge says:

          Six actually.
          Russian
          Ukrainian
          German
          English
          French
          Japanese

          Learned in more or less that order.

        8. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          I like you based off this thread. You’re alright guy. Unless you really are a Commie, an ideology whose followers I find akin to common vermin.
          But I do appreciate a good Grammar Nazi!

        9. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          My reply got stacked. That was towards NOT IMPRESSED BY TROLLS.

  10. avatar Joseph says:

    “The video shows Arbery run around the truck to the right before he cuts back in front of it. ***Then a gunshot can be heard, followed by a second shot.”

    ***Don’t ya just love the fact the writer here, for the purpose of influencing the reader, fails to mention the fact that the “jogger” then immediately attacks McMichales?

    1. avatar Not Impressed By Trolls says:

      “Arbery can be seen punching a man holding what appears to be a shotgun, who then fires a third shot point-blank.”

      Maybe read to the next sentence…and learn to spell mouth breather.

      1. avatar Joseph says:

        I chose to criticize this sentence which is LACKING completeness.

        McMichaels—- McMichales????? Ever hear of a TYPO you dipshit nitpicking twat-mouth.
        How’s that for spelling???!!

        Go suck a lemon numbnuts.

        1. avatar Not Impressed By Trolls says:

          “Twat-mouth” shouldn’t be hyphenated if it follows your other, imaginative, descriptors, “dipshit nitpicking.” Also, you’re criticizing an entire article based on the sentence structure of a single paragraph (which you’re wrong about). If that isn’t nitpicking I’m not sure what is.

        2. avatar Joseph says:

          You are certainly welcome to your STUPID opinion. And I will hyphenate any damn-thing I please. Thank you very much.

    2. avatar tdiinva says:

      Since the McMichaels were acting without legal authority Arbery was exercising his right of self defense.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Except they weren’t and he had no such right.

        1. avatar tdiinva says:

          Except they were. The Georgia statute is an and. All condition must be met not just a single one.

          There is one thing Poles and Russians agree on. Ukrainians are not the sharpest tools in the shed.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          They only have to have REASONABLE SUSPICION that all parts are met. Unprovoked flight is reasonable suspicion of criminal intent. Black letter precedent. In short, innocent men don’t run when confronted.

        3. avatar tdiinva says:

          Serge, what would you do if a couple of dudes who look like they walked off the set of Deliverance approached you on the street?

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yeah… that’s not racist at all.

          My first reaction wouldn’t be to charge the guy with the gun and try to take it from him. That would be retarded.

          My brain is functional enough to know that if they were going to shoot me, I’d have already been shot.

        5. avatar tdiinva says:

          And that is what Arbery did first. He tried to get away. You know, what you called flee the scene and everything the inbreds did after that was illegal.

        6. avatar tdiinva says:

          You misquoting the statute. They didn’t see it and had reasonable knowledge that he did. At best he had second hand knowledge. The McMichaels never claimed they were making a citizen’s arrest. Their friend the DA made it up to cover their butts. By the way, Inbred senior let his retired license to carry lapse by failing to take his use of force training.
          And round and round we go Serge the dumb Ukie without any legal training plays the guard house lawyer.

      2. avatar Joseph says:

        So was McMichael when Arbery became ARMED after grabbing the shotgun. Both then became armed.

    3. avatar Huntmaster says:

      You mean the guy brandishing the shotgun right?

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        There is no such crime in Georgia.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Except that I already provided you (earlier this week) with the Georgia statute that says there is. You know, that discussion in which you and I went back-and-forth for a while until I provided the penal code reference for you, and you went dark and abandoned the conversation because you got caught being wrong. Now you’re here in today’s article, posting three thousand comments and pounding the same sand.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          You cited a misdemeanor assault statute. Try harder. Might have worked if I didn’t already have that statute pulled up.

        3. avatar Huntmaster says:

          It’s kind of like driving your car too fast. That’s not what they call it but you’re still getting a ticket.

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          Except that the statute he cited requires that the person points the gun at somebody “without cause”… Pretty sure a convicted felon running at me when I told him to stop constitutes “cause”. It’s not “brandishing” (misdemeanor assault) unless the muzzle gets pointed at somebody.

          People mostly define “brandishing” to be when you draw your gun or have a long gun in your hands. This statute does not meet that definition. Thus, if you want to call out the “brandishing”, sure, but “brandishing” as it is commonly defined is not a crime in Georgia.

        5. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Serge,

          Three days ago, you claimed that Georgia has no statute against brandishing a firearm, and challenged me to provide the reference:

          “Please cite this magical “brandishing” statute in Georgia… I’ll wait.”

          https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/video-shows-police-attempt-to-use-a-taser-on-ahmaud-arbery/#comment-4518046

          I spent a whopping thirty seconds Googling it and responded accordingly:

          O.C.G.A. § 16-11-102
          “A person is guilty of a misdemeanor when he intentionally and without legal justification points or aims a gun or pistol at another, whether the gun or pistol is loaded or unloaded.”

          https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/video-shows-police-attempt-to-use-a-taser-on-ahmaud-arbery/#comment-4518283

          Now your excuse for failure is that this brandishing statute merely classifies as a misdemeanor instead of a felony, and therefore isn’t relevant to your Abery argument. Uh-huh.

        6. avatar pwrserge says:

          Shitty citations are easy to refute. Here’s the statute in full.

          § 16-11-102 – Pointing or aiming gun or pistol at another

          A person is guilty of a misdemeanor when he intentionally and without legal justification points or aims a gun or pistol at another, whether the gun or pistol is loaded or unloaded.

          So… let’s go over how you’re full of shit.

          1. The statute is not a “brandishing” statute because it requires you to actually aim the gun at someone.
          2. It requires you to do so without legal justification. (Both citizen’s arrest and self-defense against a charging felon are legal justifications.)
          3. It’s a misdemeanor which means that it’s legally irrelevant to the charge of felony murder.

          Now, I know you had the full statute, because you omitted the title. So not only is your interpretation full of shit. You misrepresented the record via a lie of omission.

        7. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Nice try, Sergie, but you’re backed into a corner and you know it.

          1) ‘Brandishing’ is holding a weapon in a manner that threatens the safety of another. The McMichaels approached Arbery in such a manner.

          2) ‘Legal justification’ for aiming a gun at another requires that there be good reason for drawing the weapon. Seeing as the McMichaels chased down an unarmed Arbery who was not presenting a threat to either them or anyone else, and Arbery was not observed committing – or intending, as you insist he was – any crime other than simple trespass, there was no arguable legal justification for their actions.

          3) Try as you might, you will never be able to successfully argue that an unarmed man defending himself against two approaching men brandishing guns is guilty of a crime in that instance. The McMichaels acted severely outside the scope of permissible action, and correctly stand accused of felony murder. REGARDLESS of whatever you think Arbery may have done prior to that moment. If an armed burglar enters my home and shoots in my direction with the intention of killing me, but then drops his gun and turns to walk out of the house when I confront him, I am no longer in a legal position to shoot him.

        8. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Namecalling, now? As a version of the old law profession adage goes:

          If the facts are on your side, argue the facts.
          If the evidence is on your side, argue the evidence.
          If you have neither, attack your opponent’s character.

          I wish you a wonderful day, Serge. I’m about to leave for the weekend to enjoy a much-needed vacation out of town with the family and will return next week. In about five minutes I’ll forget all about you.

        9. avatar Dude says:

          “If an armed burglar enters my home and shoots in my direction with the intention of killing me, but then drops his gun and turns to walk out of the house when I confront him, I am no longer in a legal position to shoot him.”

          In my state you can shoot that person, no matter what, if they’re in your house or along an area outside of your house that you use to access the structure. As long as they are a person that doesn’t “belong” there, like say a relative or social worker, you don’t even have to let your presence be known and it doesn’t matter if they are armed or not.

        10. avatar Dude says:

          The idea is that, if someone who doesn’t belong is in your house, then it’s reasonable to assume they present a threat. If my door is unlocked, and someone comes in and looks around, even if he is headed in the direction of the door to possibly leave, I could legally shoot him in the back of the head. I don’t have to figure out if he’s armed first. I can’t do that outside the house unless he’s in my path.

        11. avatar Joseph says:

          Shoot someone in the back who is LEAVING your house???????!!!!!

          See you on the gurney getting your lethal injection, pal.

        12. avatar Dude says:

          Haha. I never said I would do it, just that it would be legal. There are all sorts of legal things I wouldn’t do, so to speak.

      2. avatar Joseph says:

        I HAS A QUESTION for “I Haz A Question”; do you fail to comprehend this part of the law or just for convenience purposes, to make your lame-ass argument, choose to ignore it——-
        “…..points or aims a gun or pistol at another,……” ?
        Nowhere in this video do we see McMichaels, at the start,
        “AIM” or “POINT” the shotgun at the “jogger”. Only AFTER he is violently ATTACKED by the same. In his own defense I might add.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          If I’m jogging along the road, and you, Joseph, not being a sworn officer but actually appearing in plain clothes, pull your truck up next to me and jump out with a gun in your hand and tell me to stop, and your group acts to physically confine me, I will interpret your aggressive actions as life-threatening. Upon OODA, I will likely attempt to defend my life by neutralizing your ability to kill me…and seeing as I only have my fists compared to your gun, I will use what’s available to me at that moment in time.

          Even though Serge is also severely incorrect as he presents the same opinion as you do, he’s much more polished at his trolling.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Fleeing felons don’t have a right to self defense against the people using reasonable force to detain them.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Sheesh. He KILLED the jogger with the shotgun! You are somehow assuming he did that without pointing the shotgun at him?

        4. avatar Joseph says:

          Ah dipshit, the shootings happened DURING the struggle when BOTH guys had their hands on the gun.
          While struggling for a gun it is quite possible to unintentionally point the gun at YOURSELF or the other guy.

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          If the felon in question began his attack before the gun was pointed, legally, he’s the aggressor.

  11. avatar Dude says:

    Why aren’t they charging this guy for recording in portrait mode?

    1. avatar Not Impressed By Trolls says:

      Upvote!

      1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        Yes!

    2. avatar Pooper says:

      Best comment by far!!

    3. avatar Joseph says:

      I’ll bet that upon further review that will happen.

  12. avatar Joseph says:

    The first gunshot is heard AS Arbery MAKES CONTACT with the shotgun and he himself may have caused it to go off by grabbing it. The subsequent shots may also have been unintentional and more so do to the struggling for the gun.

    If these two, now three men, were intent on shooting and killing this “jogger” they would have done so a lot sooner.

    This shooting was a direct result of the “jogger” ATTACKING and punching, multiple times, a man holding a shotgun, grabbing the gun(which now made himself armed), struggling with said man in an attempt to gain full control of the gun(probably to use to shoot McMichaels), the gun discharging 3 times (possibly accidentally by either man because of the struggle), the third of which might have been intentionally aimed at the attacker in self-defense.(you do not give up your right to protect your life from an attacker and from becoming DEAD because you made an error in judgment).

    This is how the defense will play this one out. Shades of the Mike Brown/Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson case.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      False analogy. Wilson was a sworn officer acting in performance of his duties. The McMichaels were acting outside the law.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Ok… Not what the Georgia statute says. They have one of the broadest citizen’s arrest statute in the country. It just requires “reasonable suspicion” of a felony and the perpetrator to be attempting to flee said felony.

      2. avatar tdiinva says:

        Except the conditions weren’t met. They didn’t see a felony committed not did they have direct knowledge so they were acting outside the law.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          They don’t need to see the felony. They only need reasonable and probable suspicion. Basic English and Robert Barnes will tell you that there are two standards for citizen’s arrest in Georgia. One for felonies with a fleeing felon, and another for everything else. Immediate knowledge is not a part of the former standard. That’s why there’s a period between the two standards.

        2. avatar Ding Dong Ditch says:

          Well he was black. That’s reasonable suspicion, right guys?

          If the races were reversed, you all would want the shooters strung up YESTERDAY. But it was a black guy who got shot, so clearly regardless of any evidence they might have had “he was up to something”.

          You make it so easy for the Left to demonize you. When they finally succeed in stripping our rights and taking the guns away from the racist Republican bigots, you will only have yourselves to blame.

        3. avatar Doug says:

          Serge says: “Yeah… calling someone a racist just proves you have no arguments.”

          Just for the record, Serge has called people racists no less than four times in just this thread alone.

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          Not as a substitute for an argument.

        5. avatar Doug says:

          Irrelevant. You made the assertion that calling someone a racist is proof that you don’t have an argument. You have done so four times in this thread.

        6. avatar pwrserge says:

          Pointing out obvious racism on the part of people who are accusing OTHERS of being racist is not the same thing and you know it.

      3. avatar Joseph says:

        “…. outside the law…” has yet to be proven. Actually, to be precise, NOTHING has been proven.
        Citizens do have a right to confront people!

      4. avatar DDay says:

        When these two plead guilty serge is still going to claim they are innocent.

        he’s lecturing GA lawyers on what the law actually means. serge is stupider than anyone involved in the case.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Ok… who here claims to be a member of the Georgia bar? Because at least one member of the Georgia bar already laid out the logic for why there is no crime here.

        2. avatar Joseph says:

          Before this is over we will have over 100,000 opinions from members of the bar and they will be ALL OVER THE DAMN PLACE.

          Again, the only gotdamned opinion that will matter is the jurors’ learned OPINION. The rest is all claptrap.

    2. avatar Joseph says:

      P.S. It appears that the “jogger’s” left hand is on the shotgun the third time it goes off as he is throwing a right-cross at McMichael.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        And your point is?

        1. avatar Joseph says:

          POINT: THAT may have been what caused the weapon to fire!
          DUUUUUUHHHHH!!!!

        2. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Nah… what caused the weapon to fire was a finger on the trigger. A finger that shouldn’t have been there. Honestly, everybody is missing what this is going to come down to for the jury. If you just want to talk to somebody you leave your pistol in the holster and your shotgun in the truck.

        3. avatar Joseph says:

          Can you definitively say that the “jogger’s” finger DID NOT make its way onto the trigger? ???
          And would not this McMichael guy have shot this “jogger” a lot sooner if that was his intent??? Why would he put his own life at risk by letting this “jogger” get that close to him?
          Perhaps he was not anticipating being ATTACKED???!!

        4. avatar Huntmaster says:

          None of that really matters Joseph, the jogger isn’t the guy who brought the shotgun to the party.

        5. avatar Joseph says:

          Maybe in your shallow mind it doesn’t matter.
          But we shall see what a jury thinks.

        6. avatar Joseph says:

          Huntmaster, Maybe in your shallow mind it doesn’t matter.
          But we shall see what a jury thinks.

          Every incident is FLUID and changing.
          ALL that occurred has to be taken into consideration.
          A victim can become the aggressor.

          Like when a thug breaks into your house—–you are the victim—–then he tries to flee ——you shoot him—–you become the aggressor.

          Jogger is confronted by man HOLDING NOT POINTING a shotgun at him——possible victim(of what so far? Confrontation?)——Jogger ATTACKS man with shotgun—–jogger becomes aggressor.

    3. avatar Debbie W. says:

      That’s right joe…Let’s say Arbery stood incognito on a corner with a shotgun and waited for two lily white gasbags who were rumored “suspects” to drive up in a truck and Aubrey opened the door, pointed the shotgun at a gasbag and a struggle over the shotgun ensues and the gasbag was shot dead during the course of this “citizen’s arrest.”
      Would you joe defend the actions of Aubrey in the aforementioned scenario like your ignorant behind is defending the McMichaels? Yes or No.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Honey, please stop proving Islam right… I might have to convert at this rate.

      2. avatar Joseph says:

        Not even worth a reply, it is so damn stupid.

  13. avatar Steve says:

    They’re definitely reaching, what’s next, low air in the truck tires? Arresting the camera guy indeed, what was Vietnam ? what was Afghanistan ? what were the people filming the Twin Towers? Going to go arrest them all to ????

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      The DA knows he has no case, so he’s desperately trying to look like he’s “doing something”.

      1. avatar Joseph says:

        It is called appeasing the lynch mob.

    2. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Nah… they already have enough on him. No sense padding the charges.

    3. avatar DDay says:

      the mcmichaels said roddie helped them and tried to block arbery his truck. He’s not being charged for the video, he’s being charged as a participant. Read the article

  14. avatar former water walker says:

    Rowdy Roddie is in a heap of trouble. That’s about it. And I don’t give a damn when .gov wants to spy on all of us with a “contact tracing” Big Brother app. Or the new secret po-leece. What fictitious law you gonna quote then serge?!?

    1. avatar Joseph says:

      Gee, I remember that being said about Zimmerman and Officer Wilson.
      How did that work out for you shithouse lawyers out there?

      1. avatar DDay says:

        In the zimmerman case and wilson case the witnesses supported what they said. There are other witnesses to this other than the father/son and roddie. There are neighbors who saw what happened.

        This case is not remotely like the zimmerman or wilson cases. It’s much similar to the convience store case in Florida Michael Drejka Drejka tried to play cop also

        1. avatar Joseph says:

          You certainly are welcome to your stupid opinion.

          Tell me, what exactly did these OTHER witnesses say?

  15. avatar Mike V says:

    Interesting. You guys are either multi tasking geniuses, or don’t have jobs. How are so many experts on another state’s laws and the application of those laws in a particular case. Expert enough to blast one another because your right and they’re wrong.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Mostly A… It’s a burden, but you learn to live with it.

    2. avatar Chief Censor says:

      You do know Americans are not allowed to go to work unless they are “essential?” You do understand there is 40 million people without work and counting?

  16. avatar Jason says:

    Maybe the very concept of a citizen’s arrest is outdated and backward.

    Also, what’s with this phenomenon in the Deep South where you can pretty much shoot anyone who looks at you sideways, say you were in fear for your life, and whistle a jaunty tune while strolling away Scott free?

    Though it does give me a business idea. I’ll call it Jason’s Florida murder tours. That’s where you go to Florida, antagonize a stranger, and get to shoot them when they get fed up and take a swing at you.

    1. avatar Debbie W. says:

      Well jason we can all rest easy knowing you are safe and sound and reside in an ivory tower high above the “Deep South.” In all honesty jason, you need to do what the pompous democRat nancy pelosi needs to do…Pull your head from your behind, walk outside your imaginary sanctuary and see the crime and human feces on your own sidewalks.

      1. avatar Jason says:

        Right. The next time I see a guy committing a non violent crime, I’ll shoot him. If I see a homeless guy shitting on the sidewalk, I’ll shoot him.

        Let’s do America Duterte style!!

    2. avatar Joseph says:

      What an ignorant asshole, Jason.

      Have you Checked your murder and shooting stats ANYTIME !!??
      The cities in the North and Northeast States are the shooting capitals of the country you dipshit. Try the “deep NORTH” city of Chicago for starters, moron.

      Where do these assholes come from?

      I gotta get outta here. The RANK STUPIDITY is getting to me.

      1. avatar Jason says:

        Awww. Did I hurt your feelings?

        I thought this place would be full of big strong tough guys with ice water in their veins as opposed to sallies who take their ball and go home if someone says something mean about their region of origin.

        Here, let me double down. Welcome to the south. Come for the racism, stay for the poverty!

        The above also applies to Appalachia.

        1. avatar Joseph says:

          I love it what stupid doubles down on STUPIDITY !!!!!

          It tends to confirm my ability to read people.

        2. avatar GS650G says:

          And what Utopia do you live in, little buddy?

        3. avatar Joseph says:

          Cute! But stupid and useless like its author.

    3. avatar Jason says:

      Yeah, I’m personally not a fan of death squads and vigilante justice. Call me traditional, but I’m a fan of due process and prefer that due process administered by educated, trained professionals and not the toothless, mutant results of inbreeding and fetal alcohol syndrome.

      1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

        “…due process administered by educated, trained professionals and not the toothless, mutant results of inbreeding and fetal alcohol syndrome.”

        Free clue for ya, Jas – Professionals won’t be the ones deciding this one. The jury does that, you know, the “…the toothless, mutant results of inbreeding and fetal alcohol syndrome” – jury.

        Feel better, now? 🙂

        1. avatar Jason says:

          That’s a good point. And tremendously depressing.

          Heh, civilization is so fucked.

        2. avatar Joseph says:

          BAM on Jason!!!

          How does it feel being as STUPID as you? Jason, you must be a liberal inbred Northerner, A?!

          What a fucking dud you are.

      2. avatar Debbie W. says:

        RE: Jason says:
        May 22, 2020 at 10:09
        “Maybe the very concept of a citizen’s arrest is outdated and backward.”

        Let’s take your above line of stupidity and rearrange it like this…”Maybe the very concept of The Second Amendment is outdated and backward.”

        If you were not such a pompous knuckle dragger who thinks like a knee jerk gun control zealot perhaps you’d see the error of your ways…One guy does something wrong and the remedy is for everyone to lay down their rights and pay for his crime. Your stupidity and the stupidity of the McMichaels is no reason to end citizen’s arrest….Capice?

        1. avatar Jason says:

          Yeah, no. Random jackasses being able to apprehend fellow citizens is a terrible fucking idea.

          Christ, we’re not living in Deadwood, SD in the 1870s.

        2. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Look, only one person on here is advocating that… well maybe just a couple.

        3. avatar Debbie W. says:

          Jason…Your dodge ball response was pathetic. Obviously you stand for nothing and fall for anything. Just because you and the McMichaels are incapable of making a legitimate citizen’s arrest is no reason whatsoever to deny others who know when and where to make a citizen’s arrest. A citizen’s arrest that is well within the bounds of the law.
          Your own childish fears prompts you to deny the rights of your fellow man. Your reasoning is based on your own shortcomings and is in lockstep with fear based Salem Witch Hunts, etc.
          What if some citizen sees you getting the pee beat out of you? What are they to do if there is no green light to intervene and make a citizen’s arrest? How can a home owner restrain an intruder until the police arrive? How can a person make a citizen’s arrest to stop a drunk driver? How can you be so damned stupid jason? Average response time for the police is 11 minutes. And you want to deny law abiding citizens a necessary means of defense….Despicable.

        4. avatar Jason says:

          Debbie,

          I’m a firm believer in self defense up to and including lethal force if necessary. I’m also on board with castle doctrine.

          Totally fine with one citizen intervening to save another citizen from a violent attack. However, I feel that the right to apply force should end when the threat ends.

          To use one of your examples, if someone is beating the shit out of me and another citizen steps in to help, awesome. What I don’t think is a great idea is if the assailant takes off running for the citizen to play cop and give chase.

          I’m especially opposed to randos playing cop in response to nonviolent crime.

      3. avatar Joseph says:

        “Heh, civilization is so fucked.”

        Especially when it has so many MORONS in it like you.

        1. avatar Jason says:

          Is that the best you can do? Such a saddening lack of creativity.

          Perhaps you’d like to call me a doody-head next. Maybe follow up with an, “I know you are, but what am I?”

          I might also suggest a few “your mom” jokes and a “that’s what she said” or two.

        2. avatar Joseph says:

          Just making an astute observation. Sorry that it triggered your thin skin, lollypop.

        3. avatar Jason says:

          It takes way more than a lazy insult to get under my skin.

          Goddamn it! Vitriol is an art form people!

          If you’re going to come at me, fine. But try and do better than the Nickelback of insults.

        4. avatar Joseph says:

          Your constant comebacks at me prove I got your thin-skinned ass triggered.

  17. avatar cgray says:

    MAGA goobers vigilante fantasies appear to be taking a rather large hit on this one…

    1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

      And the ‘goobers’ like you, son… 🙂

    2. avatar Debbie W. says:

      cgray…you have established yourself as a cut and run race baiting democRat lowlife…Instead of your usual false accusations that give you only temporary satisfaction l’ll give you another opportunity to prove me wrong which if successful should really get you off. All you have to do is muster up what it takes to address the following…The evidence shows the Roots of Gun Control are in Racism and Genocide. I ask you cgray on this Day of Our Lord Friday May 22, 2020 to simply Justify Your Racist and Nazi Based Gun Control Agenda. You can answer or gfy.

      1. avatar Lotso Fatso says:

        Imagine being the poor guy who has to lay down with this miserable, foul mouthed crone.

    3. avatar DDay says:

      MAGA? trump’s comments were certainly not in favor of the mcmichaels and very pro trump Kemp were clearly against the mcmichaels.

      Other than dopes like serge and a few others here, I have not seen any gun owners claiming the mcmichaels are innocent.

      1. avatar Joseph says:

        Hello!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Neither Trump nor Kemp stated they were GUILTY, now did they??!!

        They are INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty, you dimwit !!

        1. avatar Miner49er says:

          “They are INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty, you dimwit !!”

          Yes, Arbey was innocent until proven guilty but that didn’t stop the McMichael’s from chasing him down in a vehicle with weapons in hand attempting to unlawfully detain him.

          That’s why they’re going to prison.

  18. avatar Lance says:

    I bet Roddy is regretting releasing that video now…

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      I bet he’s regretting leaving his house in the first place to follow them. Just like the other two.

      1. avatar Chief Censor says:

        They can live out their fantasies in prison. They can join the Aryan Brotherhood and fight all the inferiors in prison. At least the AB won’t rat them out after they stick one of the darkies.

    2. avatar DDay says:

      roddie took the video, the mcmichaels are the ones who released it (smart move lol)

      roddie will take a deal and testify against the father and son if they’re not smart enough to take a deal.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Riley took the video, and conspired with McMichaels to edit the video to remove any incriminating footage.

        That makes him an accessory after the fact at the very least as well as obstruction of justice and evidence tapering charges.

        Not to mention actively participating in the unlawful detainment by utilizing his truck to block the victims escape, as McMichaels reported to the police.

  19. avatar Steve says:

    I wonder if those guys are unemployed do they still draw their $850 a week unemployment?

  20. avatar RV6Driver says:

    They should call this blog “The Truth About White Guilt….” The pandering here is unreal.
    Anyone who goes outa their way to tell you they’re not a racist usually is one.

    So if you cucks were ever attacked by a minority would you let them have their way over fear of be convicted a racist in the court of social media?

    1. avatar Beto says:

      I wouldn’t need to since I regularly let my African American neighbor do my girlfrIiend. They deserve retribution from what our ancestors did to them.

    2. avatar Jason says:

      In this instance, no one was attacked except the guy who wound up dead.

      Maybe the guy committed the minor crime of trespass but in my mind, property crime shouldn’t be grounds for a couple of good ole boys to arm up, hop in a pickup truck and chase the guy down.

      Should security guards be able to shoot shoplifters? Should it be legal for me to open fire on a kid egging my house on Halloween?

      1. avatar Joseph says:

        ” ….committed the minor crime of trespass…”—–It was FELONY trespass.

        And your analogies are way beyond STUPID !!

        The “jogger” physically ATTACKED McMichael. What video did you watch??!

        1. avatar Jason says:

          It was still a nonviolent crime. It wasn’t like he kicked down the door of an occupied house at night. He wandered into an open structure under construction.

          Sorry, that doesn’t warrant a, “hey Cletus, lock and load.”

          And I’d try to defend myself against hillbillies chasing me down too.

          I can’t say if what the good ole boys did was Illegal under Georgia law. But if not, it should be.

        2. avatar Joseph says:

          Well, you certainly have a right to your stupid opinion.

        3. avatar GS650G says:

          Who was magically placed there. It’s called looking for a fight.
          If the two of them had stayed home we’d all be better off.

        4. avatar DDay says:

          The property owner didn’t care people were looking at the house. There was no trespass because the homeowner who would be the victim didn’t care.

      2. avatar Huntmaster says:

        Using a garden hose…

    3. avatar GS650G says:

      “So if you cucks were ever attacked by a minority would you let them have their way over fear of be convicted a racist in the court of social media?”

      Lets see… in my house? Coming out of a store ? In the process of being attacked?
      I’ll say I’d not let them or any one have shit.

      But then again I don’t chase anyone down the street to “have a talk with them”

    4. avatar Chief Censor says:

      Republicans only cuck/cower to people wearing black not people who are black. “Yes, your honor.” “Yes, officer.”

  21. avatar M says:

    Morale of the story folks: if one of your nugget escapes, let him go, you can pick another one at the KFC

  22. avatar Cletus Mc Bobby says:

    Roddy, that’s a real white trailer park trash Trumptard name here, a real winner with 8 teeth and a mullet.
    “I didn’t do no harm your Honor, me and the boys were just trying to stop that colored make from running suspiciously in our neighborhood! And 3 months ago, I recall seeing him sitting in front of the bus! He was a baaaaaad man your Honor.”

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      I have never been a vigilante. Ask my lawyer.

  23. avatar Sulla says:

    It is interesting that the only person with a clue about this case is pwrserge. You’d think self defense, citizen’s arrest, and so forth would be of interest to a bunch of guys on a gun blog. Instead, hunting out racists (real, imagined, whatever) is what really gets the commentariat excited.

    I know a lot of wammens who are like that, but it has been surprising to see it so strongly represented by gun guys. Weird.

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Parody of the day, good job.

    2. avatar GS650G says:

      “It is interesting that the only person with a clue about this case is pwrserge. ”
      He feels property crimes, or any crime he feels he knows the cause and motive behind warrants armed response. That’s not in line with a lot of values people have, certainly not mine. I’m not shooting anyone over junk I bought and certainly not on the street down from my own property.

      Gun ownership comes with rules and ethics that can protect you or land you in jail.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Holly shit straw man alert.

        Let me simple this up for you…

        If somebody tries to grab your gun, you have a right to shoot them. The video is pretty clear that the scumbag felon charged TOWARDS the people with the guns and then TURNED to attack the son rather than continuing to run away when they weren’t in his path.

        The only question of fact is wether the citizen’s arrest was justified. That’s it.

    3. avatar Debbie W. says:

      Obviously both you and pwrsurg are dumb enough to have rode right along with the McMichaels and into the jail house. You, pwresrge, the McMichaels and others with sht for brains don’t speak for “gun owners” who know better, than to risk taking the law into their hands without tangible evidence whatsoever. Citizen’s arrest, etc. are not the concern here. Murder is the concern, jackass.

    4. avatar Chief Censor says:

      Let’s not forget that McMichaels said all they were doing was trying to have a chat with Arbery. They never said he was under arrest. The corrupt and bias DA is the one that came up with that story to act as the defense attorney for the McMichaels.

  24. avatar Manse Jolly says:

    The personal attacks are getting a bit much.

    This case, if it ever does and I highly doubt it will, ain’t going to trial for probably one to two years, maybe longer. Plenty of time to argue….

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      And the jury will take about two hours. Including lunch.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        That we can agree on. This will be one of the fastest “not guilty” verdicts in recent history. Unless the prosecutor has some pretty damning evidence that hasn’t surfaced yet, he’s going to have a VERY hard time proving his case beyond a reasonable doubt.

        1. avatar Debbie W. says:

          You and the democRat adam schieff have a whole lot in common. You are both outhouse lawyers who are stuck on stupid. Thanks to no tangible evidence whatsoever against Aubery and the decisions and sleazy actions of the McMichaels the trial is over before it begins. Case Closed.

        2. avatar DDay says:

          There are other witnesses you moron. There are neutral people who where home who watched this unfold.

          roddie will take a deal and testify against the father and son. The father and son will try to get their own deal and save themselves from life in prison I would be surprised if the father and son don’t plead guilty in a plea deal

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Well, then we’ll see what they say in open court. Unless the DA has a lot more evidence than what has been presented right now, everyone involved will walk.

        4. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Why would the prosecution give them a deal? This is a slam dunk. It’s all on tape. And the star witness is going to turn on them.

      2. avatar Manse Jolly says:

        I would just about bet money they take a Plea Deal. Wait and see I reckon. In the meantime, the sun is out finally after all the rain we’ve been getting and I’ll be at the range tomorrow.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Unless the DA pleads this down to a misdemeanor, I don’t see that happening. There is too much reasonable doubt in this case given what we know, to fold just yet.

        2. avatar Dude says:

          Sometimes people make deals even when they don’t want to if they can’t continue to pay their legal fees.

  25. avatar Nanashi says:

    Just more proof the prosecution is politically motivated.

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      Nope. You can’t get warrants without evidence, especially when everyone is on the look out for corruption. There is no way Republicans are going to do what you are accusing them of doing without evidence. There is evidence on video of Roddy’s felony and the McMichaels felony. There is large amounts of communications that exposes the truth.

      They arrested Roddy to pressure him into spilling the entire can of beans. They want to hear about this private vigilante group the neighborhood setup. Soon they might arrest Larry English too.

      The Republicans have a lot of incentive to clean house before the elections. If they fail to do so, the Democrats will take over Georgia and will control it for a long time. They learned that from Virginia. Georgia is on their minds.

      The DA in control of the case is a Republican not a Democrat. She is a black woman from the city. She is one of those types that “walked away” from the plantation.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Um… You’re not quite clear on how warrants work, are you? Let me simple it up. I can arrest and indict a ham sandwich.

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          You can’t arrest and search a man’s property without probably cause supported by oath or affirmation. That would allow the victim to sue the government and all evidence obtained will be tossed out of court. Illegal searches and seizures will ruin a case and allow the criminal to walk forever.

          So, unless the government is trying to mess up the case to allow the murderers to walk, they are doing things by the book. Why else would Republicans turn on their own?

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          You mean how the FBI wiretapped dozens of Trump campaign members based on a story they made up?

  26. avatar Ralph says:

    This is becoming a paper-hanging farce. I wonder if they’ll arrest the prosecutors who wouldn’t prosecute and the cops who wouldn’t arrest (conspiracy!), the AG who recused (accessory after the fact!), and the company who sold Arbery those sh!tty running shoes.

    This is getting stupid.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Getting? I’ve been seeing the proverbial autistic screeching around here for at least the past week.

    2. avatar Chief Censor says:

      It’s called a conspiracy. Those involved in the conspiracy are subject to arrest and conviction.

      I bet you are one of those people that want Obama arrested?

      There is a thing called corruption. Even the government commits crimes. Yup, that means cops too.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        You can’t require someone to unlock a phone or any other electronic device, warrant or no warrant, that’s black letter precedent. You want to seize my phone, have fun with a brick.

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          Uhhh… The government has backdoors coded into the software. Just to let you know. If they want in, they can easily make copies of your stuff.

          You have to encrypt your stuff with encryption not created by the government and hand off the keys physically to the people you want to have conversations with.

          Now don’t ask me the details on how to evade government surveillance. That could lead to charges.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Unless you install a kill switch to flash your drives if certain failsafes aren’t met.

        3. avatar DDay says:

          You can’t require someone to unlock a phone or any other electronic device, warrant or no warrant, that’s black letter precedent. You want to seize my phone, have fun with a brick.

          The courts are mixed on the issue, some for, some against. SCOTUS has not ruled on it and there is no settled law on the issue.

  27. avatar Debbie W. says:

    Both McMichaels are charged with MURDER. If you are accompanying someone who commits MURDER you both get equal treatment in most states. The cameraman pal that the McMichaels ratted on is charged with murder but he probably gets a plea, 10 years or perhaps time served if no bail and provided he sings. The cameraman pal was probably an ear for all the McMichael’s sinister plans. Plans that backfired BIG TIME. Ain’t dat right pwrserg you McMichael lint licker?

    1. avatar Jim Cox says:

      pwrserg is nothing more than a ‘power sewer’. He’s all over this web site like he knows everything about everything. Writes things like he’s a real tough guy. Kind of wonder what he does in the little time he insn’t spewing his over-opinionated, self indulging mental masturbation on this site. He seems to think that he has more entitlement to his opinion than anyone else. So serg…who do you think wants to hear your shit run off? Hey you probably had’nt seen your dick in 20 years so maybe you ought to just shut the fuck up too! And I don’t give a pair of your lace panties what you think you closet cock sucker. So stew on this A-hol;,look me up, any time BRO

  28. avatar Debbie W. says:

    Abraham Lincoln
    November 19, 1863

    Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

    Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

    But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

    Never Forget…All Gave Some, Some Gave All.

  29. avatar strych9 says:

    I’m gonna go slug down like 3 liters of water after reading this thread.

    It’s a goddamn salt mine.

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      All you got to do is dodge the communist white supremacist.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        … so… basically… you?

      2. avatar strych9 says:

        If I’m going to bother reading a thread I tend to read the whole thing. Exceptions being people I know to literally never say anything useful.

        Like a certain poster who used to hang out here with literally nothing but a mix of bullshit and copy+paste from other gun blogs and message boards.

        The truth about this particular thread is that there’s actually a fair number of good points from a variety of people, they’re just too hot under the collar about this. Kinda the nature of the web, but also historically rare for TTAG.

  30. avatar Hannibal says:

    Maybe some of you don’t realize this but if you’re part of a lynching you are still responsible even if you weren’t the one to put a rope around the victim’s neck.

    He wasn’t just recording something that happened. He was part of the ambush. And not only was he stupid enough to chase some guy down in the middle of the day for an alleged trespass charge (no, pwserge, you’re an idiot) but he was stupid enough to record the guy’s murder after he had the absolute nerve to fight back against two random shitbirds trying to kidnap him.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Ok Lector, prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he didn’t have intent to commit theft when he entered that building. I’ll wait. Why? Because that’s what you’re going to have to do in court to prove that their suspicions of a felony being committed were both unreasonable and improbable.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        “ Lector, prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he didn’t have intent to commit theft when he entered that building”

        Well you certainly flipped the standard there.
        Unfortunately for you and the McMichaels, the burden is upon them to prove he had criminal intent.

        The McMichaels are the ones making the claim, it will be up to them to provide evidence to prove their claim he intended to commit a burglary. That will probably be very difficult as they didn’t witness anything related to Arby’s jogging route.

  31. avatar Dan W says:

    Shoot shovel and shut up. Clearly the law is not on your side, even of you have video evidence.

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      Yup. The “law” is no longer on the side of white supremacists. You need to change over to a democracy to fix that. Then you need to deport all the brown people and only allow Europeans to immigrate.

  32. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    As I said before these two guys need to articulate WHY they shot an unarmed man, a criminal, who was running away from them. I have yet to hear or read a single story saying black people should arm themselves. White Liberals are not saying blacks should get guns. Just as the majority population has a variety of guns.

    The white socialist progressives want blacks kept disarmed. They are the enemy of black people. Even black criminals will be mistreated, abused and denied their civil rights. In the system created and maintained, by white Liberals in all the major cities. Controlled by white democrat liberals.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      Let’s be honest. There’s no winning with the people you mention. They’re gonna spin like a porky soccer mom on a stationary bike no matter what happens.

      For example, if the guy running was really just out for a jog, say it was Colion Noir, and the guy was entirely law abiding his entire life… can you imagine the white liberal freak-out when Noir blasts those two fat boys into the hereafter?

      I can. They’re not gonna get overtly racist about it but that’s going to be the subtext of the story that “There’s too many guns in America! Look, these two guys with shotguns got zapped by this black dude and that wouldn’t have happened if we just had gun control because handguns be sooooo dangerous ‘in the wrong hands’ so we gotta take murder machines off the streets!”.

      Of course they’ll have someone like Jackson or Sharpton talk about the racist white rednecks to the black folks but then they’ll have Shannon Watts go to the white people and subtly suggest it was the colored guy who’s “more” at fault because the darkies can’t be trusted with firearms.

      Both ends against the middle, same as it ever was.

  33. avatar Joseph says:

    Damn, are they gonna charge everyone who lives on that block? Running scared and trying desperately to avoid riots.

  34. avatar Joseph says:

    P.S. I believe they yelled they WANTED TO “TALK” to him—-never mentioned to him “we want to shoot your black ass, nigga”!

  35. avatar Peter Gunn says:

    There are minutes of video that have not been released to the public.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email