Man unfairly sentenced to life in prison for "role" in death

A man, William Bryan, has been unfairly sentenced to life in prison for his "role" in the death of a young black man (Ahmaud Arbery).

What did he actually do?
He pulled out of his own driveway with his truck to block the path of someone else who was running down the street.
Then he followed that person in his truck.

For this, he was blamed for "murder" and given life in prison.

To make the situation more outrageous, William Bryan is the same man who actually filmed the death, and there is practically no evidence that William Bryan did these things other than his own testimony and the video he himself took and gave to police.

William Bryan freely handed this over to police, and gave an account of what happened, because he did not believe he himself had done anything wrong.

This sounds completely insane and unjust, so what could be responsible for him being given a life sentence and blamed for a death he did not commit?
Probably the main reason is that emotions were running high, in a state of near hysteria, because the victim was black and people see it has three white men "ganging up" to kill a black man.

Even though the young black man was only shot because he charged at another man (Travis McMichael) and tried to pry away the shotgun he was holding from his hands. (This was captured on the video William Bryan took)

William Bryan tried to block the path of the young black man because he was running and he saw two of his other neighbors chasing him. Both of those men were on a neighborhood patrol and one of them was a retired police officer. So Bryan assumed that the person they were chasing had probably just been caught trying to commit a burglary or theft in the neighborhood and they were chasing him to keep to track his location until police could arrive.

The fact that the suspect was black likely also a factor in why Bryan assumed his neighbors were chasing someone who had committed a crime. For this, many people are angry at Bryan, that his actions against the young black man were likely influenced (even if only in part) by "racism". That Arbery might not have done what he did if the suspect had not been black. Even if it is understandable why Bryan did what he did.

There are additional details about this.

This was one of the most damning parts of Bryan's testimony, captured on a police body camera while he was giving a report of what happened to a police officer who had shown up on scene:
"I pulled out of my driveway, was gonna try to block him. He was going all around it. And I made a few moves at him, you know? And... um... he didn't stop."

From this, some people believe that he repeatedly tried to hit Arbery with the truck. (Which could be evidence of trying to harm Arbery if true) But that is not necessarily the case and Bryan's language is kind of vague. It may have been that Bryan was just in a little bit of shock after the witnessing altercation and killing, and Bryan was also prone to exaggeration and embellishment a little bit, almost a little boastful, believing that they had done the right thing by trying to stop a criminal in their neighborhood, and taking some glee in discussing their attempts to try to stop him from running away.

A hand print from Arbery was also found on Bryan's truck. Some people believe this constitutes evidence that Bryan actually hit Arbery with his truck or came up extremely close to him trying to harass him.
However, according to testimony from Travis McMichael, Arbery had gone up to Bryan's truck and was banging on the driver's side window. (Probably because Arbery was angry that he was being continuously being followed, and that Bryan had earlier tried to cut his path off while he was running in the middle of the road. Arbery may have been banging on the truck to annoy Bryan and imply a passive threat that he could mess up the man's vehicle if he continued following him)
Those who believe Arbery was "murdered" say that Arbery was feeling terror the whole time. But others who defend the shooting of Arbery say Arbery was "playing" with them the whole time, and that his actions were motivated in part by anger and resentment, not wanting to be chased by three white men. (In fact at the trial, Greg McMichael said he wanted to make sure Arbery knew they were not just "playing around", which implies that there may have been some perception that Arbery seemed to be toying with them) So there are two different perspectives on this.

William Bryan was charged with "murder" and "attempt to commit false imprisonment", even though of course he never murdered anyone, never tried to kill or murder anyone, the evidence is extremely flimsy that he even attempted to harm Arbery, he never actually tried to detain Arbery himself, and there is no solid evidence that was even going to try to personally do it.

Why then was he charged with "murder" and "attempt to commit false imprisonment"?
The argument is that the death of Arbery would likely not have happened if William Bryan had not been following him. Some people view this as William Bryan "driving" the suspect towards the other two men in the other truck. (It is not even clear that that is what William Bryan specifically intended to do) This caused Arbery to feel fear (either that they might be trying to harm him, or that they would hold him there until police arrived and police might arrest him, or that he would go back to prison if his probation were revoked, whether that was actually a rational thought or not), and those who believe William Bryan is guilty believe fear is what drove Arbery to attempt to pry the shotgun out of Travis's hands (whether that was actually a logical thing to do or not) and resulted in his death.

If William Bryan's actions ended up leading to the death of someone, even if it was very indirectly, and those actions constituted a felony and their was animus against the suspect, then under a strict literal reading of the state law, Bryan would be guilty of murder. (Keep in mind the literalistic legal versus ethical distinction. A literal interpretation of a law may not always be fair or right)

In addition, after William Bryan was sentenced to life in prison in the state of Georgia, he was then tried separately again in federal court and convicted of "using force and threats of force to intimidate and interfere with Arbery's right to use a public street because of his race", and "attempted kidnapping".
So he will be sentenced two separate times for the same "crime".
This means that even if his conviction is overturned, or his sentence is commuted in state court, he will still have to serve prison in federal court. This will make it double hard for him to try to overturn his conviction.

In my opinion, these verdicts against him seem to be fueled by anger, emotion, and "mob justice".

William Bryan also faced poor conditions while being held in prison before his trial.
Arbery defendant describes only being allowed out of jail cell 1 hour a day

 

related threads about this case:
Critique of the judge's closing statements in Arbery case
Three men who chased Arbery sentenced to life in prison
really long threads with lots of petty bickering: Travis McMichael says in his murder trial that he felt threatened by Ahmaud Arbery , Ahmaud was murdered , All 3 men guilty of murder in the killing of Ahmaud Arbery , Ahmaud Arbery case: Jury finds McMichaels, Bryan guilty on felony murder charges


another similar case involving a black man being killed and the officer who accidentally killed him facing grossly excessive punishment:
Derek Chauvin pleads guilty to federal charges, on top of already being sentenced by state
A Miscarriage of Justice , A Miscarriage of Justice. Part 2. , A Miscarriage of Justice. Part 3.

 

So, he helped those guys to catch and kill Ahmaud Arbery, filmed the event, and failed to intervene to stop the crime and failed to call the police to stop it.

He absolutely sounds like an accessory to the crime. This is what I was able to find about his role through a quick search:

“The evidence says that he went from his home, according to his attorney, and minutes later he was in his truck following Ahmaud Arbery, who was a jogger in his neighborhood, around. He recorded Ahmaud. The evidence indicates that he blocked Ahmaud with his truck and allowed two other men to ambush and kill him.”​

Source: https://www.okayplayer.com/news/fam...t-of-william-bryan-who-recorded-shooting.html

And all he got for that was 35 years. Seems more than fair to me.

 

That is not a "fact", that is a characterization of the facts.

Hopefully you are able to understand the difference.

(Yes, he did try "blocking" Arbery when Arbery was running in the street right in front of Bryan's house when Bryan had just pulled out of his driveway. He admitted to that)

 

He was sentenced to life in prison, with the possibility of parole, in state court.
Then, after that, he was separately sentenced to 35 years in federal court. (The sentencing just took place today, coincidentally)

In the state of Georgia, due to a change in the law, those sentenced to life in prison are not eligible for parole until after they have already served 30 years of their sentence.

 

He watched and recorded a murder.
And then sat on it for 2 months before it surfaced.
Why didn't he call the police upon hearing gun shots?

 

GBI agent: Roddie Bryan called Arbery a 'joker' as his body lay ...
https://www.ajc.com › news › atlanta-news › gbi-agent-ro...

Feb 18, 2022 — BRUNSWICK - William “Roddie” Bryan had never seen Ahmaud Arbery and didn't know if a crime had been committed when he left his front porch, ...

 

Everyone was enraged and angry by the comments made by the three men, but what if Arbery had actually been acting like a joker and seemed to be toying with them? If true, then that could very well explain their seemingly derogatory/disrespectful comments about him.

But everyone else did not believe that, rather they chose to believe that Arbery was "terrified" and "running for his life".

If one of them had seen the suspect actually carry out a serious crime, then it would have been legal for them to detain him until the police arrived, but that was not the case. Gregory McMichael just had a strong suspicion, and the other two came along because they assumed if Gregory, the old retired police officer, was in a hurry to chase the suspect, there must have been an adequate reason. (Police officers do this too, automatically chase a suspect or assist in an arrest once they see another officer beginning it, even though they might have no idea why the suspect is being arrested. When they are in a hurry, there's no time)

 

I can easily prove what you said is not true with this article:

"The man who recorded video of the shooting death of Ahmaud Arbery said in recent television interviews he was not involved in the incident despite having been named by Gregory McMichael in the police report. Many in the local community have called for the arrest of William "Roddy" Bryan. The video, shot by Bryan through the front windshield of a car, follows Arbery as he jogs down a residential street outside Brunswick, then encounters Gregory and Travis McMichael waiting for him in a pickup truck."​

Man Who Filmed Arbery Shooting Denies Involement Despite Police Report - Georgia Public Broadcasting (gpb.org)

In other words, the video he took was released before his arrest.
Furthermore there is a body cam video everyone is aware of where Bryan was interviewed by an officer the day of the incident and described what happened.

 

From viewing the video and reading about what led up to it, I don't believe that Arbery was murdered by anyone. I think that he was shot reluctantly, as a last resort in self defense. The men who were convicted and imprisoned for his death, were convicted because they are white, as a sacrifice or appeasement to black mob violence.

 

I think you are right.

 

Judging by the length of the sentences, probably.

 

And that only makes it even more difficult to argue that Bryan was guilty. (Obviously a member of a group can't be guilty of murder if the killing was not murder)

But let us suppose, just for the sake of hypothetical argument that it was a murder, that Travis did commit a murder when he shot Arbery. Well, even if that had been the case, the question needs to be asked, what is it that makes Bryan guilty for that murder? Bryan is not the one who shot him. There is really no solid evidence that Bryan intended to severely harm or kill him.

It seems like the concept of "group responsibility" is being applied here. Since Bryan was seen as being "part of the group", he is seen as being responsible for things that other members of that group did. But this doesn't seem entirely fair. For one thing, this wasn't really an "obvious crime", like a home invasion or robbery. There is the "felony murder" legal doctrine, but to try to apply in a situation like this one is huge stretch. Because many of the main reasons the felony murder legal doctrine applies in other situations does not apply here. (That seems like it is applying piecemeal logic, assuming a principle without looking at the whole picture)

Though many conservatives will not agree with me, I don't think the "felony murder" principle should apply in many situations. It is unfair and not right. (But many conservatives don't seem to care because they are just looking for any excuse to be punitive on criminals) I suppose this is really a separate complicated issue, which we have no hope of resolving in this discussion. But my point is, it's not fair to just assume the "felony murder" principle should be in operation and use that as the justification for holding him responsible for the killing, without an argument specific to the situation.

By many arguments, Bryan was not completely wrong to do what he did, or it was an easy mistake to make. This is a very different type of situation from a person choosing to break into a home or taking part in the robbery of a bank.

I also think, in my view, there is no absolute evidence that Bryan's actions constituted a plan to try to carry out an arrest, or should have necessarily been seen as such. As far as I am concerned, his actions could be seen as an attempt to slow the suspect down and be able to keep an eye on the suspect's location until the police could have arrived. Bryan did not know in that situation that there was not really any adequate reason for police to stop the suspect, but it could be argued he had reason to believe that was, or could likely have been the case, or at least it could be argued that it was easy for him to make the mistaken assumption that there was a reason for police to stop the suspect. This isn't just a criminal mistake that Bryan made, it was easy to make a mistake, there are several mitigating factors, and even if it was not fully and adequately justified, it was still at least partially justified. Those are not really the sort of circumstances where someone should be held entirely responsible for a killing, in my view.

What if the same standards were applied to police? If they could be held responsible for a killing if they had taken part in a chase of the suspect and it later turned out there was no adequate reason to have chased them. That would be absurd, wouldn't it?
Police commonly chase suspects all the time, even when they have no personal knowledge that suspect actually committed a crime. Many times the officers chasing a suspect may not even know the reason the suspect is being chased. They see (or are made aware of) other officers chasing the suspect, and there is no time to fully communicate. It's not like one officer has to give a sworn testimony of what the alleged crime is before the other officers give in to the chase. Bryan simply saw his two neighbors, who he knew very well, chasing a suspect and knew one of them was a retired former police officer. And they were on the informal neighborhood watch.

 

The people who should be in prison are those who sentenced these innocent men to prison.

 

There is not any way to prove it for absolute certain, but I strongly suspect they would not have been sentenced to life in prison, probably would not even have been prosecuted at all, if the victim had not been black.
It's notable that the first prosecutor recused herself from the case, and then the second prosecutor also recused himself from the case, saying that the McMichaels actions had been perfectly legal. They both probably did not want to be involved in the controversial case.

Remember, when the police first made the report, they did not believe a crime had happened at all. It was only later after this story got wall to wall national media attention that prosecutors came in and wanted to charge them. The incident happened February 23, 2020, and it was not until May 5 that the video became available to the public. Very quickly right after that another investigation was launched and only 2 days later, the two McMichaels were arrested on May 7.
Due to outrage about nothing yet having been done, the head state DA also directed an investigation to be launched against the two district attorneys who had recused themselves from the case. Bryan was not arrested until May 21, since it was not at all obvious at that time that he had done anything wrong.

It then emerged that Bryan had told investigators he heard Travis McMichael use the N-word after shooting Arbery dead.

Then on April 28, it was announced that the three were also being indicted on federal "hate crime" and "kidnapping" charges, on top of the charges coming from the state.

 

Let me try to take your statement apart.

The fact that he "filmed the event" is not any reason why he should be prosecuted. Filming the event is not a crime and was not in any way wrong. "The event" that Bryan filmed is not what Bryan did but what other people did. Other than the fact that the film shows Arbery running away, back towards the direction of the McMichaels, as Bryan in his truck follows Arbery.
(keep in mind that the filming was a dash cam video, camera attached to front window of vehicle. Bryan was not holding the camera with his hands)

Your statement that Bryan "failed to intervene to stop the crime" is stupid. He neither had any legal obligation to intervene, nor did he even have the ability to stop the actions that the others were doing after a certain point in time.

It seems to me you are confusing and conflating the actions of different people and different things together into one thing, making it difficult to carry out any discussion with you.

Next, you bring up the fact that Bryan did not call police. There may not have been time to call the police. It may not have been safe, practical, or legal for Bryan to use his phone while he was driving, trying to follow Arbery. Bryan probably had good reason to assume the police had probably already been called.
Even if police had been called, it would not have made a difference in the outcome.

Let's go back to the first two things in your statement. You claimed he "helped those guys to catch and kill Ahmaud Arbery".

Is it your claim that helping -- helping in any way -- people to catch someone else is tantamount to kidnapping? Even when it involves pulling your car out of the driveway of your own house to block someone else's path while they are running in the street?

Because I would say that's a big big stretch.

I think anyone who is actually correctly informed about this story can agree that Bryan did not intend, expect, or have any idea that Arbery would be killed.

Your position seems to be that you are blaming Bryan the resulting outcome that was in part due to his actions, even though his actions were not really very wrong, and even though it would have been unreasonable for Bryan to foresee that his actions could result in that outcome.
And even though Bryan had some legitimate and partially reasonable reason to do what he did, even if his actions may not have been completely justified.

The connection between what Bryan did and the death of Arbery was not an obvious one and was very indirect. This is not like a death during a robbery, home invasion, normal kidnapping, or reckless shooting of a gun -- the normal types of crimes where someone like Bryan might be seen as an accomplice and culpable in a death.

If this had been a police officer seeing a person running in the street being chased by someone else who appeared to be a police officer, he would most likely have done the same thing that Bryan did.

I also think it is possible (or not impossible) to make the argument that Bryan was trying to slow down the person, whom he assumed was a suspect, to give police time to arrive, and that he assumed police had been called or would very soon be called.

 

so you think criminals being charged with murder if one of their co-criminals murders while they commit a crime is bad law?

 

This video provides a good timeline on what actually happened. kazenatsu seems to be speculating regarding the events, what people were thinking during the time, making excuses for them. To me it looks like men were sentenced appropriately for a modern day lynching.

After watching this video it is clear that Arbery was hunted down, trapped and then murdered. It is clear how Bryan was involved because he participated in the hunting down and trapping of this young man. Arbery didn’t do anything other than go into a house being built and there is footage of many people entering that house at different times on other days and nobody did anything. Was he running off with expensive equipment? They had him on video, they could have let him be and let the police find and charge him with what — trespassing? It was a stupid senseless murder by three men who decided to take the law into their own hands. After listening to the judge it is painfully clear the sentences were justified.

 

Kazenatsu is fun to watch. He doesn't read or pay attention to his own source material. It seems to me he doesn't think it possible for a white male to be in the wrong when a female or POC is involved. At least, he's defended child molesters and guys convicted for kiddie porn in this forum.

 

These men were punished for "murder" because of what some people assume their "intent" was, what they were "trying to do", what they were thinking.

Without that part of it, it would be very difficult to argue that their actions alone amounted to murder.

So I think it is entirely fair to offer up some plausible possibilities of what they might have been thinking or what their motivations could have been.

 

Alright. They shot a man jogging through their neighborhood. The man whose sentence you're talking about helped and thereby made himself a part of the crime. His sentence seems appropriate.

 

You are trying to lump all three of them together, as if all their actions were completely planned and coordinated together. That is your fallacy.

William Bryan did not shoot anyone. The man who did shoot Arbery only shot him after Arbery suddenly charged at him and tried to pry the gun out of his hands.
Arbery even appears to have punched the man who killed him before he was shot, in the video.

 

They're 'lumped together because they acted together. Planned or not.

They chased a man down and killed him. The law provides a consequence for their actions. Mr. Bryan is paying that consequence.

 

That's not fair.

In some crimes, like home burglaries or robbery, that legal concept can apply. But this crime (if you view it as a crime, because some do not) is not like that.
A crime like a robbery is a serious crime, is obviously completely wrong, and the persons involved should know what could result from that.

Trying to slow someone down and follow them because you assume they have committed a crime, even if your belief is not adequately justified, is not the same as a robbery. What William Bryan did is not anywhere as serious or malevolent as a robbery or burglary.

Some people argue that William Bryan's intention was to take part in a wrongful arrest tantamount to kidnapping, but I would argue there is no solid evidence that is what his intent actually was, and even if that were his intent, that is still not necessarily relevant, because Bryan's actions up to that point did not actually constitute carrying out kidnapping.

It seems all of the arguments from those who believe Bryan is guilty are just based on some semantic generalization.

Given all the circumstances behind their actions, I do not believe the "felony murder" doctrine should apply, even if their actions are seen as being criminal.

Pulling out of your driveway to block someone's path, trying to slow them down, and then following them, should not expose someone to "felony murder" legal liability, in my view. In my view, the logic behind the court's decision was insane. And they were lacking in any solid evidence that Bryan had actually hit Arbery with his truck (which would have changed things, if true).