Defensive Carry banner
1 - 20 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
46,192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
We've seen this in the news, and my opinion is it's a cluster "goat roping" for all involved--Arbery included. My wife said something about it while watching a news report. I said Arbery is 50% responsible for his own death. Why, she asked. The video of the incident clearly shows Arbery charge across the street to confront (attack, if one prefers) a man armed with a shotgun who is attempting to conduct a very questionable "citizens arrest." I said to her, "Do you think I would attempt to take away a gun from someone across the road pointing a gun at me? Sticking it in my face is one thing, but racing across a street to make a grab attempt is beyond stupid, and stupid won the stupid prize that day."

Discretion is the better part of valor, and this was a fail on the part of all involved.

Opinions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,166 Posts
I remember when this first became popular a year or two ago, but haven’t followed along with the trial. A “cluster” is certainly right. Based on my memory, three people in two vehicles tried to hit/stop him, to make their “arrest”. I don’t really know what I would have done in his position there. The video was taken a ways back. He tried to run around the drivers side of the vehicle. Would he have been better off trying to turn around and run another direction? Who knows. To the best of my knowledge, there is still no evidence that he was involved in any sort of criminal activity, but it’s possible that much more info has out since I followed it last.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46,192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Pretty close recall. Snatching a gun stuck in your face is one thing. Running across a road to try the same is another--and something I call foolish. I'm not sure what he was thinking, but it was a bad decision.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46,192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Agree, but that was not the case.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,220 Posts
Making ones self a target, even though a moving target, is a bad idea. Heading straight at the guy with a gun when he has time to aim and shoot is another bad idea. Two bad ideas made for a bad outcome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,166 Posts
Just out of curiosity, what do people think he should have done?

turn and run back where he came from, toward the vehicle that tried to hit him?

turn and run off the road through someone’s property?

stop where he was?

Something else?
 
  • Like
Reactions: APX-9M and PEF

·
Registered
Joined
·
46,192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Making ones self a target, even though a moving target, is a bad idea. Heading straight at the guy with a gun when he has time to aim and shoot is another bad idea. Two bad ideas made for a bad outcome.
And that's my line of thinking. Had he just complied, played along, he probably would have been the recipient of a mega lawsuit instead of a dirt nap. There was a whole lot of stupid going on at that time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,375 Posts
Just out of curiosity, what do people think he should have done?

turn and run back where he came from, toward the vehicle that tried to hit him?

turn and run off the road through someone’s property?

stop where he was?

Something else?
IF......I was "HIM"* (not me), I'd have done as @OldVet said: Play their game, then sue the pants off those "cracker's".
*knowing what "limited info I have"
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
488 Posts
They say he was just out for a jog. I have 2 questions-1-Why was he jogging in work boots and not sneakers? 2-Why did he go snooping in a house that was under construction/repairs while jogging?---Sturgis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,166 Posts
They say he was just out for a jog. I have 2 questions-1-Why was he jogging in work boots and not sneakers? 2-Why did he go snooping in a house that was under construction/repairs while jogging?---Sturgis
Doesn’t look like work boots to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46,192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
They say he was just out for a jog. I have 2 questions-1-Why was he jogging in work boots and not sneakers? 2-Why did he go snooping in a house that was under construction/repairs while jogging?---Sturgis
I've got nothing about the boots, but my wife and I often walked through houses being built to get ideas about what we would like.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,762 Posts
Here is some info from the same folks providing the coverage of the Rittenhouse trial:

7 facts the jury will probably never hear.

Arbery Trial on Legal Insurrection
That "7 facts the jury will probably never hear" is pretty amazing. Also, the fact that the judge admonished the defense attorney saying that in his court there will be a process "that is fair to everybody." I thought a basic principle of American jurisprudence is that a criminal trial is fair to the defendant. That's why we have "innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt," not "most likely guilty." "Fair to everybody" is more the standard for a civil trial.

I really don't understand why the guy who videoed the whole thing is facing trial. If he were a CNN photographer, he would have gotten a Pulitzer by now.

Still, I can't side with the main defendants. They did not have probably cause to make a citizen's arrest IMHO. They did not witness him committing a crime that day. The deceased may have acted irrationally towards the guy with the shotgun, but the guy with the shotgun started the confrontation with not legal defense for doing so.

As an aside, if the defendant who had previously been a government investigator thought that was all legal, I can only imagine what kind of shenanigans he pulled when he was carrying a badge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,963 Posts
Here we are looking at a situation where the justice system failed. At least in this case the three men involved were residents of the neighborhood, and did maintain some distance between themselves and the criminal. While their actions may have been not the best thought out, they did not intend to harm anyone, which is important.

Having seen other people negatively impacted with drug toxicology results being withheld in their trials, I hope that doesn't happen. A friend of my Dad's was nearly murdered by a drunk and high college age girl who rammed his car with hers. The jury ruled it was an accident because they lacked that pertinent information, and he got no settlement to help pay his medical costs. He never will be physically right again. That happened almost 30 years ago now.

In this case, withholding such information could lead to prison sentences. Wrongfully.

It's BS that prior acts are not admissible in court. They go to giving motive of the acts taken. Most criminals are career criminals and if their past actions are the same as what led to the current trials should be admissible in court.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,166 Posts
That "7 facts the jury will probably never hear" is pretty amazing. Also, the fact that the judge admonished the defense attorney saying that in his court there will be a process "that is fair to everybody." I thought a basic principle of American jurisprudence is that a criminal trial is fair to the defendant. That's why we have "innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt," not "most likely guilty." "Fair to everybody" is more the standard for a civil trial.

I really don't understand why the guy who videoed the whole thing is facing trial. If he were a CNN photographer, he would have gotten a Pulitzer by now.

Still, I can't side with the main defendants. They did not have probably cause to make a citizen's arrest IMHO. They did not witness him committing a crime that day. The deceased may have acted irrationally towards the guy with the shotgun, but the guy with the shotgun started the confrontation with not legal defense for doing so.

As an aside, if the defendant who had previously been a government investigator thought that was all legal, I can only imagine what kind of shenanigans he pulled when he was carrying a badge.
The guy who took the video was “with” the people in the other vehicle and was helping them try to catch arberry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,006 Posts
Just out of curiosity, what do people think he should have done?

turn and run back where he came from, toward the vehicle that tried to hit him?

turn and run off the road through someone’s property?

stop where he was?

Something else?
His best option would have been to stop, throw up his hands, and see what they wanted.

I generally do not like that option but in the video, it appears to be about the only one.

He could not outrun them, he could not outgun them, he had nowhere to take cover or safely flee to.

So, stop and figure out what the heck was going on.

They likely would not have shot him with his hands in the air and on video.

They then could have worked it out when the Police got there.

I'm not sure who called the Police or when, but they were on their way.

Trying to grab the gun turned a chase in to a gun fight.

And, at that point, when he was obviously trying to take the gun from those chasing him, they fired to keep him from getting their gun and killing them, which is self-defense.

Now, it is up to the courts to figure out if self-defense applies when one is chasing someone along with if they had a valid reason or not.

If, as they have said, there have been thefts from homes being built and this guy was snooping around a home being built, their fears of theft are easily understandable.

I do not think race played as much of a part in this as the MSM has reported other than this guy did not live there and they all knew it. This could have applied regardless of his race.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,575 Posts
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I guess I'm in the minority here.

Put yourself in Arbrey's shoes. Two trucks coming at you, one guy in the bed with a long gun, not cops, yelling at you to stop.

I can see how someone might want to flee immediately.

And then the trucks give chase, try to box you in - I can see how someone can panic.

Finally, I've walked through houses under construction in Glynn County, on St. Simons Island. I didn't steal anything, I was just curious as to the floor plans, etc. Not a big deal.

The guys here screwed up. Murder or some other crime? I don't know, and I'm not following the trial.

I will say the voir dire and the expression of some jurors having a negative impression of the defendants, and the alleged Brady allegations gives me some concern. All trials should be impartial and fair. And as I get older and watch cases more closely, I've found there are a lot a unethical prosecutors out there.
 
1 - 20 of 90 Posts
Top