As far as I know, and what I have heard about the case they never saw Arbery actual trespass on the property, they never saw him steal anything, they actually had no evidence that a crime had been committed, and even if a crime HAD been committed they did not have the right or authority to attempt to apprehend Aubrey.
They took it upon themselves to chase a man down just because they didn't like the look of him, and then killed him. If that's not the definition of a lynching I don't know what is.
I hope they never get out of prison.
Thank you.
@BrawlMan was, I think, unnecessarily acerbic but your post and his has me reviewing the fact pattern of the case. At worst, and it would be really bad, these yahoos were in their trucks with their guns cruising the neighborhood looking to play hero, saw a black guy running, decided for reasons of racism to stop him thinking him up to no good, resulting in his murder. That we have footage of the trespass (and I'm pretty sure, of him exiting the property and beginning from running from there? Thought I'd seen that.) may be an irrelevant distraction.
Reviewing that other question as well (would they be off the hook if they, for the sake of argument, convinced the Jury that they thought Arbery in the process of committing a felony: Edit, even if they were factually incorrect?)
ITMT: The video appear to have something to do with this. They may have seen it and just been cruising with their guns regardless. I'm looking for information as to why they were in the cars with their guns in the 1st place. Something I was asked in another post earlier.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-...ery-killing-was-guilty-malice-murder-rcna6660 " Defense attorneys said the McMichaels chased Arbery because they suspected he was a burglar who had been recorded on video inside a house under construction nearby. ... The defendants argued self-defense, as well as that they acted within their rights under Georgia's citizen's arrest law, which was legal at the time but was changed later in the wake of the shooting. " I wonder what the changes were.
2nd EDIT: Long story short, Travis McMichael claims he had a potentially dangerous run in with someone meeting Arbery's description who appeared to be casing a building under construction. 3 days later, dad runs into the house saying he just saw someone meeting the description (Arbery) running by, so they grabbed their guns and got into the truck.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/travis-mcmichael-testifies-defense-ahmaud-arbery-case/story?id=81227117
Can I just add that the only reason they were convicted was video being released. Fighting for justice seems to mean diddly squat to some people without evidence.
I think
@Seanchaidh has it correct. A lot of the times, you don't get justice unless you pursuit it very hard. A prosecutor will often just drop the case if for any reason s/he doesn't think it worth pursuing. (Or in this case, may have wanted to cover it up). I'm not sure about the video. Even without it, I don't think you have any facts in dispute. It sounds like the Defense argued that Arbery's actions necessitated what McMichael did. You don't need the video to show this appears to have been so but that legally that does not matter. They pulled up on him. He had a right to act as he did. And therefore, his killing was unlawful.