re: The Officer Tatum

quote:

---

what had previously happened? If you do ok it wasn't a legal citizens arrest. I'm just not sure all of the info is out in the public.

---

I suggest you go read the police report.

McMichael Sr. said they didn't see him at the construction house, only running past his own house and they thought he might have been a person who had robbed houses months ago.

quote:

---

So they were both moving to the front of the truck. Why does Arbery not have the same courtesy of self-defense as McMichael, especially when he was unarmed?

---

I think most people watching the video at full speed would likely conclude (guess) that Arbery initiated, at least in the sense of him wrapping around the front of the truck.

I think a more intelligent explanation of that belief would have to involve learned experience about momentum, Arbery's speed as he moved to the right and how the confrontation progressed after they come back into the scene. And I don't really know how to articulate that.

But I'll certainly leave open the possibility that is wrong and McMichael did it, since we can't see.

quote:

---

wouldn't call him a thief because he didn't take anything

---

People are calling him a thief because he had a former shoplifting a TV incident. Most people in this thread were in the 77 page thread "is breaking and entering..."

quote:

---

from the video I saw the first shot was fired after Arbery got to Travis

---

I would wholly disagree. You can hear a shot right after Arbery rounds the passenger's side.

You see two more after they're engaged. Bluegrass Belle posted a still from the moment of the first shot where you can see Travis McMichael standing there and you don't see Arbery.



You can then see when Arbery presumably makes contact and McMichael goes backwards, leading to this.

quote:

---

that's not exactly what I see in the police report

quote:

---

McMicheal stated he was in his front yard and saw the suspect from the break-ins "hauling arse" down Satilla Drive toward Burford Drive.

---

---

The break-ins he's referring to are previous instances. None of which have been corroborated by police. Here's the full line you're quoting:

quote:

---

McMichael stated there have been several Break-ins in the neighborhood and
further the suspect was caught on surveillance video. McMichael stated he was in
his front yard and saw the suspect from the break-ins "hauling arse" down Satilla
Drive toward Burford Drive.

---

quote:

---

I'm pretty sure I have not once stated that I think the McMichaels are innocent or guilty of whatever you want to accuse them of. I have asked questions and provided a counter point (devils advocate) to some points raised in this thread.

---

It doesn’t matter. The simple fact that you aren’t masturbating to the race porn that Tigress, Kilroy and Ignerio throw at you daily is enough for them to shout you down and call you a racist.

They are fricking children.

Just wait. Tigress will tell us another story of her father (daddy issues)

It’s a fricking contest at this point to see who has more virtue!

quote:

---

The fact that this was not a legal citizens arrest

---

I think there are layers to this as well. For example - let’s say for the sake of argument that it was a legal citizen’s arrest. Per the Supreme Court of Georgia, “only force that is reasonable under the circumstances may be used to restrain the individual arrested.” So there’s a question of whether the shotgun was used as part of the citizen’s arrest. Sure, Georgia is an open carry state. But it’s not like the McMichaels were out-and-about, open carrying, and happened to see a crime committed. Travis McMichael grabbed a shotgun for the purpose of making a citizen’s arrest. Once you grab a shotgun and go after the guy, can you really say that you used deadly force in self-defense, rather than as part of the arrest?

Then let’s say for the sake of argument that it wasn’t unreasonable force - in other words, he was carrying a shotgun at the same time as making a citizen’s arrest, rather than carrying a shotgun in order to make a citizen’s arrest. Now the question is whether Travis McMichael can legitimately claim “self defense” when he was the one who brought a shotgun. While McMichael has a right to defend himself, so does Arbery. These aren’t uniformed police officers that stopped him - it’s two guys in a pickup truck, one of which is toting a shotgun. It’s not a huge stretch to suggest that Arbery could have reasonably feared for his life in that situation. So really this part comes down to: does Arbery have a right to self-defense in that situation, regardless of whether he had just committed a crime?

The TL;DR version is this:

In order for the McMichaels to be innocent, all of these things must be true:
1. They were performing a legal citizen’s arrest. (This requires it’s own set of assumptions which have been discussed at length.)
2. The use of deadly force was not part of the citizen’s arrest, but was rather a separate event that happened during the arrest.
3. Arbery had no right to defend himself if he felt his life was in danger. This is a tough argument considering that the McMichaels could not legally use deadly force to detain him in the first place.

quote:

---

The simple fact that you aren’t masturbating to the race porn that Tigress, Kilroy and Ignerio throw at you daily is enough for them to shout you down and call you a racist.

---

So emotional you resort to making things up. Lmao.