You are a liar. We can see the video evidence that TM did in fact aim his shotgun at AA right here:he had absolutely no reason to believe they would shoot him since they didn't even aim guns at him much less threaten him during the entire Pursuit
View attachment 447659
It’s “aimed” enough to call it aimed. And the camera cut away as TM was bringing the gun barrel higher. You are also a liar because you can’t see TM past this frame. And you DON’T see TM until after he shoots AA from his adjusted position in front of the truck. Then we see TM as he retreats and the struggje for the gun begins.
You are lying when you claim that TM did not aim his shotgun again when he was out of view and fired the first shot.
Can you prove he aimed the shotgun at your criminal hero?It’s “aimed” enough to call it aimed.
Right here you dumb-ass liar.Can you prove he aimed the shotgun at your criminal hero?
what frame is it proved??
That means TM has committed a felony before he shoots AA in the chest a few seconds later. You said, “Travis McMichael had a very reasonable suspicion that this individual planned to do him harm” when AA swerved to avoid him and run on the other side of the truck.but Travis McMichael had a very reasonable suspicion that this individual planned to do him harm... anyone who continues to advance while you're holding a shotgun in the low ready position and warning them to stop their advance clearly has a violent intention
Right here you dumb-ass liar.View attachment 447682Can you prove he aimed the shotgun at your criminal hero?
what frame is it proved??
You want to call that the “low ready position” as if there is no relationship to ‘aiming it at AA’ in that image. WTF is wrong with your brain? In that image, who do you think the “low ready positioned” shotgun is “aimed” at?
Yes, it is aimed at convincing AA to discontinue running in the direction he is running. You tell us that yourself in post: 26408274
That means TM has committed a felony before he shoots AA in the chest a few seconds later. You said, “Travis McMichael had a very reasonable suspicion that this individual planned to do him harm” when AA swerved to avoid him and run on the other side of the truck.but Travis McMichael had a very reasonable suspicion that this individual planned to do him harm... anyone who continues to advance while you're holding a shotgun in the low ready position and warning them to stop their advance clearly has a violent intention
But from evidence provided in the video we know that TM was not a bit afraid of AA because his next move was to run toward the area where AA was headed after the swerve.
This is TM’s route toward danger .......
View attachment 447710
Why did TM move from the first position where he held the shotgun in the low ready position aimed to get AA to quit running straight at him - and then when AA did quit running straight at him - TM went to the only spot where he had to aim the gun once again in the low ready position and order AA to quit running at him - again?
Think about it. You freaking idiot. You make no sense.View attachment 447709
You dumb ass lying white supremacist, in your racist world, you say AA decided to “sneak attack around the truck” however TM was not standing two feet in front of the truck when the sneak attack was planned. TM was standing here:it was NOT AIMED AT ARBERRY
(it was about to be that's why he tried to sneak around the truck and jump Travis with his ridiculous 90 degree turn attack)
Reply to 26414403You dumb ass lying white supremacist, in your racist world, you say AA decided to “sneak attack around the truck” however TM was not standing two feet in front of the truck when the sneak attack was planned. TM was standing here:it was NOT AIMED AT ARBERRY
(it was about to be that's why he tried to sneak around the truck and jump Travis with his ridiculous 90 degree turn attack)
View attachment 447883
To sneak attack in your fantasy world, AA Would have to have known that AA was going to move to the front of the truck because TM still feared that AA was armed and didn’t want to be shot by a charging violent black armed criminal all the while his aging father stood fully exposed without a gun in his hand to the charging violent retarded black criminal - nice son that white boy yes indeed.
And this is part of your fantasy.
View attachment 447886
Are you saying they emerged 2 feet in front of the truck in direct line with a 90 degree attack by AA on TM who was standing his ground two feet in front of the vehicle when he was ruthlessly and violently attacked for no reason?
View attachment 447890
If TM was standing one or two feet in front of the vehicle why can’t we see his foot or his feet at any time. Why can’t we see AA’s foot or feet at anytime when the first shot was fired while both men were according to you fighting one or two feet inb front of the truck. Not one of the images show an actual foot standing on the ground. View attachment 447891View attachment 447892View attachment 447893View attachment 447894
View attachment 447895View attachment 447896
All that but you can’t explain the main problem with your case. You did not explain why we cannot see either man’s foot from under the truck where we see shadows if both men were doing all this fighting 1 foot to 2 foot away from the front of the truck.View attachment 447937View attachment 447938View attachment 447939Reply to 26414403You dumb ass lying white supremacist, in your racist world, you say AA decided to “sneak attack around the truck” however TM was not standing two feet in front of the truck when the sneak attack was planned. TM was standing here:it was NOT AIMED AT ARBERRY
(it was about to be that's why he tried to sneak around the truck and jump Travis with his ridiculous 90 degree turn attack)
View attachment 447883
To sneak attack in your fantasy world, AA Would have to have known that AA was going to move to the front of the truck because TM still feared that AA was armed and didn’t want to be shot by a charging violent black armed criminal all the while his aging father stood fully exposed without a gun in his hand to the charging violent retarded black criminal - nice son that white boy yes indeed.
And this is part of your fantasy.
View attachment 447886
Are you saying they emerged 2 feet in front of the truck in direct line with a 90 degree attack by AA on TM who was standing his ground two feet in front of the vehicle when he was ruthlessly and violently attacked for no reason?
View attachment 447890
If TM was standing one or two feet in front of the vehicle why can’t we see his foot or his feet at any time. Why can’t we see AA’s foot or feet at anytime when the first shot was fired while both men were according to you fighting one or two feet inb front of the truck. Not one of the images show an actual foot standing on the ground. View attachment 447891View attachment 447892View attachment 447893View attachment 447894
View attachment 447895View attachment 447896
Here's the famous 90-degree turn where Maude attacks Travis McMichael long before the 1st discharge of the shotgun seen in this Frame
View attachment 447940
* anyone can clearly see the discharge in the upper right-hand portion and can clearly see Travis McMichael having been pushed several feet backward as he is literally in the air reeling from the assault when the first shot is fired
It is painfully obvious in this video I've been posting throughout the thread
Tell me forensic genius. Is that AA’s right or left shoulder in the frame you posted:Maude attacks Travis McMichael long before the 1st discharge of the shotgun seen in this Frame
Because the gun blast is there while we can still see AA before he disappears in front of the truck
you cant see arberry when the first shot is discharged because he is completely obscured by the vehicle however you can clearly see the blast and understand its timing thanks to the audio and clearly see Travis McMichael flying through the air landing on the yellow line immediately after the first dischargeTell me forensic genius. Is that AA’s right or left shoulder in the frame you posted:Maude attacks Travis McMichael long before the 1st discharge of the shotgun seen in this Frame
View attachment 447997
Sure, he could've concealed it. As soon as he started running, though, it would fall out.So you believe it would be terribly difficult to conceal a high-capacity 9 mm in a long pair of cotton cargo shorts and a baggy dry white T-shirt?
Neither is, or was, a law enforcement "professional". An argument could maybe be made for Travis, but Greg was so "professional" he had to retire because he missed too much in the way of required training...as professional law enforcement agents...
You're a fucking idiot.He just didn't count on the fact that Travis was a trained military operator with the u.s. Coast Guard in a division that amounts to an international Maritime SWAT team
What do you mean it doesn’t matter? It matters because your whole line of bullshit is wrong. If TM ran ahead of AA and cut off his path then TM is probably 6 feet ahead of the truck and there is no 90° angle that AA turned. There is none of your white supremacist bullshit that TM was using the engine block for cover standing right next to the truck if he’s about 6 feet away when the first shot was fired. Now that you are giving up your ridiculous interpretation of the facts Such as the one where you say TM walked about 3 feet after he raised his shotgun and aimed towards AA from the driver side of the truck to the position 6 feet ahead of the truck where he’s blocking AAs path it means there is no argument that TM was simply standing his ground. It means TM was aggressive and attacking the route we’re AA decided to go as an escape. TM cannot claim self-defense when he is blocking AAs escape and he shoots AA in the lower chest.It doesn't matter at all if he ran in front of arberry and blocked his straight line path of Escape
They were within their rights to do a citizens arrest from the career felon snagged in the act of committing a crime. The moment the felon attacked them which he did---they gain the right to Self Defense.The McMichaels could not be standing their ground. Not according to the law. They are ineligible for that defense.I never refuted anything I said...Stand your ground is an extension of the Castle Doctrine. It ended for criminal and civil litigation the need to retreat from threat when the person was doing nothing wrong. If you are in your home and someone enters unbidden. You do not need to lock yourself in a bathroom to hide from them. Your home is your castle.Stand your ground is designed to determine who was the aggressorI did not discuss Self Defense. That has been covered previously. I answered the question concerning Stand Your Ground. Or do you deny that the intent of stand your ground was when a victim was attacked without provocation by a criminal?translation; by chasing a criminal you provoked them and are automatically liable to be attackedStand your ground does not apply. For it presumes that the individual standing has done nothing to instigate the altercation. If you were on the street. Awaiting the arrival of a friend. And were accosted by a miscreant. Then Stand Your Ground would be appropriate. It is in fact the very reason they passed such laws.What does it mean to you?"standing your ground," doesn’t literally mean standing in one spot on the ground.
Travis was not standing his ground. Either by text or by intent of the statute. The defense of Stand your Ground would not be allowed if it was offered. And should not be.
Travis is facing a lifetime in prison for his crimes. And in Georgia we know he commuted those crimes. By the collective standard that is our understanding of Georgia Norms and laws, Travis is the criminal. That is why he remains in Jail awaiting Trial. That is why he was denied bail, as were the co-defendants.
from now on never chase someone you suspect of committing a crime and you won't have to worry about provoking them to commit an act of violence
Of course the next time an undercover cop is chasing someone they can turn around and kill him by claiming his Chase provoked their violence of action
good job boys
In any given incident when there is plenty of opportunity to retreat and someone actually covers ground in an effort to engage another party it's pretty clear who the aggressor is
By providing legal protection to those who do not cover ground in an effort to confront another individual you give Society a chance to do the right thing
For instance if arberry were actually jogging and two murderous klansman pulled up in a pickup truck pointing weapons at him and screaming "I'm going to kill NIGG*ER" then it would be perfectly reasonable for him to pull a gun and kill both of them as he would have no duty to retreat and a legitimate fear of great bodily harm or death
That's why citizen's arrest is such a dangerous thing to do because the person who you're trying to detain has a lot of opportunity to kill you
Trouble for you social justice fantasy Warriors is the fact that the McMichaels were sitting still having given up their Pursuit when they were closed on confronted and subsequently attacked
when on the street going about your day. You do not need to retreat before the criminal aggressor. Providing you are doing nothing to instigate or exacerbate the altercation. The Stand your Ground and Castle Doctrine vanish as options when you pursue someone. You are no longer standing your ground. You are in fact pursuing someone who is retreating.
Your legal authority to pursue someone is dependent upon the situation as is your lawful authority to use force. In Georgia we long ago decided that the excuse “I thought” was not sufficient. You had to catch them in the act.
What you can’t do is treat the law like a Chinese Restaurant. You can’t pick one from Column A and two from Column B. When you start with one, you are stuck with it. What you want is for people to hop from law to law like they are playing hopscotch.
According to you it was perfectly reasonable and legal to set off in pursuit. You said it was a valid Citizens Arrest situation. And you have repudiated that and then embraced it and then repudiated it again. The sequence of events in totality are criminal. You can’t isolate one moment and claim that moment absent all other considerations was legal and right. Context matters.
If you throw a brick through a car window. Criminal. If you smash the same window to rescue a dog on a hot day. Legal. Context, the why. Not just the what. The why. The intent if you will.
The Why determines if what you did, the actions, were legal or a criminal act. As does the sequence of events leading to the event.
A man attacks you with a baseball bat. You shoot him. Self defense. He pursued you from the bar you just left. Still self defense. He was angry that you had grabbed his girlfriend’s ass and punched him in the mouth. Ok. Self defense is looking a little shakier. Your weapon is being carried illegally. You are in a lot of trouble. Understand now?
to reiterate Ad nauseam a citizen's arrest was a perfectly reasonable thing to do under the circumstances but if Travis McMichael had run Maude down and shot him then you might have a case but the fact is the McMichaels were standing still when Maude made the conscious decision to close on them and attack
The McMichaels were standing their ground in the middle of the road after having pursued arberry
arberry realized that men who were pursuing him we're standing in the middle of the road very likely waiting for him
with nearly half of a football field in between the two individuals maude decided to close directly on his Target but when Travis McMichael shouldered his shotgun Maude realized that he was going to get shot if he continued to charge directly at him so he pulled the sneak attack around the truck and got his dumb ass shot anyway
* you understand now?
what the hell was this experienced criminal thinking???
"hey there's the two guys who were chasing me earlier and one of them is now holding a shotgun standing in the middle of the road"
" I guess I should continue running directly at them and if they stand in my way punch them in the throat"
it's not like he was trapped in a dark alley with armed assailants closing in from both directions he had plenty of reasonable opportunities to escape or just keep on "jogging"
He wasn't forced to attack anyone and had no justifiable reason to believe these men were going to shoot him if he continued to flee
if it is painfully obvious what happened in the one second that took place between in front of the truck when we can only see your shadows and a cap and shoulders through the windshield why I have you been lying and believing the TM was standing his ground 1 to 2 feet in front of the truck.It’s very obvious to me that you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about that one second when both men were hidden from view in front of the truck. There was no 9° turn by AAA. That is impossible. If TM dud not stand a foot away from the front of the truck.TM could not have been protecting his father who was standing in the bed of the truck fully exposed to being potentially shot by AAA. How can that be you dumb ass.It's so painfully obvious from the slow-motion video that Travis McMichael was assaulted and then responded by defending himself that your assertions have become well past laughable
I have just proven to king G that it was impossible AA attacked before the first shot because of the shadows under the truck for TM to be one or 2 feet away from the front of the truck when the first shot was fired. That means TM was probably 6 feet in front of the truck and blocking AA’s path and HE shot AA Within the half second after AA came around the front of the truck.The moment the felon attacked them which he did---they gain the right to Self Defense.
Nope. You are stupid if you believe that. There was no crime prior to the attempted felonious apprehension that resulted in death.They were within their rights to do a citizens arrest from the career felon snagged in the act of committing a crime.
Then why have you been lying the past few months that you see AA run around the truck and turn 90 degrees to attack TM who was no more that two feet in front of the truck with the shotgun pointed down. You can’t see TM either but you’ve been telling us all along what you see him doing when nobody else can.you cant see arberry when the first shot is discharged because he is completely obscured by the vehicle
are you actually suggesting experienced young black criminals don't know how to run with a gun in their pocket? LOLSure, he could've concealed it. As soon as he started running, though, it would fall out.So you believe it would be terribly difficult to conceal a high-capacity 9 mm in a long pair of cotton cargo shorts and a baggy dry white T-shirt?
This is the gun I carry every day. It's a Colt .380 Government Model Series 80. It weighs right about 22 ounces. If I had it tucked in my waistband, and tried to run, it'd likely come flying out:
View attachment 448051
For comparison, a Glock 19 is heavier and, accordingly, would be even more difficult to run with when stuffed in a waistband of a pair of shorts.
You obviously have zero experience with firearms, so I won't waste any more time engaging you on the topic. It's just another on which you are monumentally ignorant...
Neither is, or was, a law enforcement "professional". An argument could maybe be made for Travis, but Greg was so "professional" he had to retire because he missed too much in the way of required training...as professional law enforcement agents...
You're a fucking idiot.He just didn't count on the fact that Travis was a trained military operator with the u.s. Coast Guard in a division that amounts to an international Maritime SWAT team
LOLOLOL!!!!
"International Maritime SWAT team". LOLOLOL!!!!
You're such a douche...
