Citizen’s Arrest Gone Bad Or Vigilantism? The Death Of Ahmaud Arbery
On February 23 of this year, a 25 year old man named Ahmaud Arbery was shot and killed. A witness filmed the confrontation. His killers claim they were attempting to make a citizen’s arrest of someone they suspected of having committed theft. Ahmaud Arbery was out for a jog. He wasn’t carrying any stolen property when he was confronted and killed.
The Atlanta Journal Constitution shared this video of the incident.
Two men, Gregory McMichael and his son Travis have been arrested in the killing. The arrest happened 74 days after the killing, on May 7, 2020.
The delay in arrests has been a frustration to many people. Their frustration is understandable. There are reasons it took so long, however, including different prosecutors recusing themselves from the case. Gregory McMichael was a former police officer and had previously had working relationships with several of the people assigned to aspects of this case.
Citizen’s Arrests: The Law
At the core of the defense for Gregory and Travis McMichael is their claim they were attempting to make a “citizen’s arrest” of Ahmaud Arbury. Georgia state law states the following about citizen’s arrests:
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.
O.C.G.A. 17-4-60 (2010)
17-4-60. Grounds for arrest
The law requires the offense to have been committed in the presence of the individual attempting to make a citizen’s arrest or for them to have an immediate knowledge of the crime. The McMichaels had neither. What they had was a suspicion; a suspicion many could consider unreasonable.
Threats And Force
The McMichaels appear to have initiated aggression against Ahmaud Arbery, first through threats, then with actual force. Ahmaud naturally felt threatened, confronted by two men with guns. If he tried to run, they had a truck and could run him down, or it could reasonably have been believed they would just shoot him in the back.
The only possible option where he would have stayed alive was for him to just allow them to detain him. With that being said, how many people would simply allow a random person to detain them? How likely is it that an African American man who had reportedly experienced previous instances of racist harassment as well as problems with law enforcement would feel safe letting someone chase him down and hold him at gunpoint? Ahmaud likely felt he was in a no win situation.
Conflict Resolution
In one theory of conflict resolution, there are three approaches or perspectives we can come from. These approaches are:
- Power Based: An approach using power or strength to impose a preferred outcome
- Interest Based: An approach focusing on common interests, priorities, concerns, or preferences.
- Rights Based: An approach based on rights, duties, or obligations, whether based in human rights, contracts, agreements, or concepts of fairness.
Power
Let’s look at these approaches as they apply in the situation leading up to the death of Ahmaud Arbery. Gregory and Travis McMichaels used a power based approach to the situation. They intimidated Ahmaud using weapons, and greater numbers. Even the fact they were using a truck to track down and detain someone on foot was intimidating.
Interest
An interest based approach or outcome was virtually impossible. The McMichaels wanted to detain Ahmaud, while he wanted to keep his freedom. If they had approached him differently then interest based solution might have been possible. For example, if they had approached him without guns, and without intimidation, perhaps they could have had a pleasant discussion about wanting to have a nice, crime-free town and asked him if he knew anything about the crimes allegedly taking place.
Rights
When it comes to rights, the situation is just as clear. The McMichaels had no right to detain Ahmaud and no right to use force or threat against him. Their attempt to do so does not fit the legal definition for a citizens arrest. Their rights were not violated. Ahmaud had done nothing to hurt them or to damage or take their property.
On the other hand, what rights did Ahmaud have? He had the right to peacefully move from place to place and go for a jog. Once he was threatened and especially once force was used against him, he had the right to self defense. At the core, and most importantly, Ahmaud Arbery had the right to life. All of these rights were taken away from him by the McMichaels.
Citizen’s Arrests, Vigilantism, And Homicide
From a cursory reading of the statute about citizen’s arrests, it doesn’t appear the actions of the McMichaels would fall under legal citizen’s arrest. It’s possible a judge and jury may disagree, of course. From the perspective of conflict resolution, it seems the situation was forced and handled poorly. When it comes to the human and civil rights of those involved, there can be little doubt Ahmaun Arbery’s rights were violated, denied, and taken from him by those who had no right to do what they did.
From the evidence we have seen so far, this was no citizen’s arrest. It was vigilantism and homicide.
Garrett Leeds is the founder of the Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness Project
If you would like to support the Life, Liberty, And Pursuit Of Happiness Project, please consider contributing to LLPHP via GoFundMe