Again, the problem I have with this line of argumentation protesting Arbery’s complete innocence is that it inevitably, if unintentionally, carries the implication that something hinges on his innocence. It does not. Whatever the specific circumstances of what Arbery was doing here, some people sometimes do steal stuff, and some of those people are black. And those people, too - just like white miscreants under similar circumstances presenting no physical threat whatsoever - should not be at risk of pursuit and murder by redneck lynch mobs.
Accosting and murdering a hypothetical man who did steal some copper wire from a building site is no more justified than accosting and murdering a man who was just jogging.
I’ll add - I almost hope Arbery is proven to have stolen something. And that his murderers are convicted and get the death penalty. To get the message across to all racist redneck assholes who want to organize lynch mobs that it is totally fucking irrelevant what the guy was doing if it was not violent and presents no threat to you whatsoever. In a civilized society, if you think something is suspicious you call the cops.
If he stole something they will be acquitted and this will serve as proof that black men are all criminals and white men with guns are our best defense. It will absolutely justify everything in the minds of people who desperately want this story to not be true.
If being white is central to your sense of yourself, when you read this story, you put yourself in the white person’s place. Anything that possibly justifies them will be embraced and magnified.
Yup, unfortunately that’s probably the reality if it goes to a local jury. But I still think we should aspire to do better, we should avoid too much focus on a narrative that he was a totally innocent jogger, honor student, worked in a soup kitchen, etc. - even if it’s true in this case, and even if it makes a more compelling story. A black person should not be held to some higher standard of unimpeachable sainthood to avoid being summarily murdered by a racist lynch mob.
I absolutely agree. But the “everyone knows THEY are all thieves and rapists. You can’t say it out loud anymore, but everyone KNOWS it’s true, even liberal pussies who won’t admit it bwcause they hate their own race, and given that, you’ve got to keep an eye on them, like these guys were doing” contingent is strong out there.
So he jogs, MAYBE trespasses, doesn’t take anything (it appears), continues jogging. There’s allegedly robberies in the area, this unarmed black guy just wandered into a home under construction in broad daylight, IT MUST BE HIM! Let’s confront him with weapons! Uhp, he fought back! I shot him within my rights.
This seems to be the summary of the police, prosecutors and the murderers. Zero brains being used whatsoever.
Local news actually checked on the “robberies in the area” defense put forward in defense of the shooters. The police have no records of any reported burglaries in the area in recent months.
No doubt it depends on your definition of area. For example, some people think area includes the whole country; other people think it includes their imagination.
And to whoever it was that says they hope these murderers get the death penalty: A civilized society does better than that. I hope they get incarcerated for life.
That’s the damned thing about this (and some previous incidents). Completely different standards of “suspicious” versus appropriate behaviors.
Everything Arbery did beginning with jogging the neighborhood was viewed with suspicion, and any deviation from jogging with hands visible and no stopping will be endlessly reviewed by helpful internet ‘analysts’ finding fault with the victim. But it’s apparently appropriate for the neighborhood upright citizen’s brigade to arm themselves, mount their pickup trucks of justice, chase down and apprehend an outsider for looking at a house being built. And if he resists, shoot him dead, because ‘self defense’ and freedom I guess.
So, whatever the media and anyone else might do in dissecting and analyzing Arbery’s earlier actions, what will happen at trial? Shouldn’t the judge rule any evidence about what Arbery might have been doing earlier inadmissible? How could it possibly be relevant to the fact that two (or possibly three) men armed themselves, pursued and accosted a man who (certainly at the time when they accosted him) was not committing any crime - he was not carrying anything, and presented no threat to them or anyone else - and murdered him? How could anything that he might have done earlier mitigate that murder? Even if he had committed a crime earlier, surely these circumstances are way outside what might conceivably be argued to be an attempt at a “citizen’s arrest”?
Imagine brandishing a gun and saying “we want to talk to you”?
He doesn’t stop because maybe he don’t want to talk to that person.
Then they trap him using 2 vehicles and the kid in front takes lightning quick measures so that he can’t run around them. But the guy was so quick that it was impossible to handle the situation like say in gun training classes.
The brandishing of guns in this case is so gd strange.