"People can be in front you you after following you."

>True but for whatever reason, Arbery decided to continue running up to a now-stationary vehicle and try to take a gunman's weapon. At that instant, I consider him a chaser rather than a chasee.

And towards the end, Arbery is running up to a parked truck where he proceeds to attack a guy with a gun.

I was expecting Arbery to be running away from the gunmen when fire was opened, not towards one he was currently wrestling with.

Klamarine so you except black guy hunted down with shotgun to lay down and give up. What the heck would you do if some shotgun hill billy came up to you with shotgun pointed at you. I would hope you would defend yourself.

If you just take a step back it should be easy to see why the victim felt he needed act in self defense:

What if you were jogging along and you got into a part of town that you didn't usually go to and maybe you felt a little out of place. Then all of the sudden, several vehicles full of people with guns start chasing you. You try to run away, but they cut you off and hop out of their vehicle with guns. I think most people would think to themselves "I am about to either be killed to kidnapped" and feel the need to defend themselves.

What is at the center of this case is the idea of "citizens arrest". This is spelled out in the letter basically stating that if you witness a felony, you are able to take action to prevent someone from fleeing. This works not just in empowering the citizens, but in making sure that everyone involved knows what is going on. If you stab someone and someone starts chasing you, your brain doesn't ask "Why am I being chased". That is why the premises of this approach is so important. Did these individuals witness a felony that gave them the right to chase this man down and arrest him? While the letter grazes over this point and says "Yeah, totally", the facts simply don't support that perspective. No felony was committed and as such, they did not have the right to engage in this pursuit. As this death arose from improper actions by the pursuers, they should be prosecuted.

You simply cannot provoke someone into a situation where they act in self defense, and then kill them when they do. You have no right to self defense in that situation as you are the aggressor.

EDIT: Now that I've posted this, I don't really know why I quoted you haha. I agree with everything you said.

He should have taken shotgun and beat the shit out of those two rednecks. Well within his rights but cause he is black might as well shoot him right. Fucking Georgia. They had to have special prosecutor step in because they are pussies.

It's at this point, I have to wonder if the gunmen made their intentions clear: did they tell Arbery that they intended to do a citizens arrest? Or did they just tell Arbery they intended to kill him? Or something else?...

Have we any additional video of the run-ins between the involved parties?

If you watch the video of the shooting, you'll notice it was Arbery who did the running up to and fist-swinging.

No worries I know what loser side is.  Shame actual decent human being had lose his life because some low lifes.  If they were truly concerned about robbery maybe they should have thought twice or once before thinking some random black guy jogging is actually robber.  Fact is they are as about as dumb as box of rocks

So who was dumb redneck that jumped out of truck with shotgun and allowed himself to almost get his weapon taken?

Typically when you are an unarmed individual in a confrontation with an armed individual, your best tactic is to close the distance and disarm that individual. If you believe your life is in danger, standing around 10 feet from a guy with a gun is a pretty terrible tactical move.

Again, you have to think of this as a self-defense issue from the victim's perspective. These individuals chasing him with guns had no legal right to apprehend him. As such, I believe a reasonable person in this situation would see themselves as being in danger. In such a situation, he has the legal right to engage physically in self-defense.

About to hear Florida stand your ground defense now. Worked a few times but not lately.

And no if I watched video and I notice truck almost running his ass over then armed man with shotgun coming out.

"Typically when you are an unarmed individual in a confrontation with an armed individual, your best tactic is to close the distance and disarm that individual."

>That depends on the distance. If the distance is long, the armed individual will have plenty of time to point and shoot you and the video shows Arbery having to close a considerable distance before reaching the truck. Arbery had to run to get to the truck even!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHo_C_rsuKg

"If you believe your life is in danger, standing around 10 feet from a guy with a gun is a pretty terrible tactical move."

>Arbery's best move would have been to continue running away, he stands no chance against multiple armed men. But he didn't.

"Again, you have to think of this as a self-defense issue from the victim's perspective. These individuals chasing him with guns had no legal right to apprehend him. As such, I believe a reasonable person in this situation would see themselves as being in danger. In such a situation, he has the legal right to engage physically in self-defense."

>I'm not a lawyer but from the sound of the linked letter, https://georgiarecorder.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Barnhill-letter-Brunswick-shooting.pdf , the gunmen might have had a legal right to apprehend...

A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2006/17/17-4-60.html