A group of men chased a black jogger – with one warning “I’ll blow your f****** head off!” – because they assumed he had committed a crime, a court has heard.
Ahmaud Arbery was pursued for five minutes by the group before being shot dead near Brunswick, Georgia, on 23 February 2020.
A phone video of the killing sparked outrage, and jurors were told on Friday that Mr Arbery had given the group no reason to suspect him of anything.
“They assumed that he must have committed some crime that day,” prosecutor Linda Dunikoski told the court.
“He tried to run around their truck and get away from these strangers, total strangers, who had already told him that they would kill him. And then they killed him,” she said.
Advertisement
The 25-year-old was chased by Greg McMichael, 65, and his son Travis McMichael, 35, who grabbed weapons and got in their truck as he ran though their neighbourhood.
The court was told that William “Roddie” Bryan, 52, a neighbour, joined in and recorded the video of Travis McMichael shooting Mr Arbery three times.
More from US
The chase began after another neighbour saw Mr Arbery wandering inside a home under construction, where security cameras had recorded him before, and called a police non-emergency number.
Greg McMichael told police that at one point he had shouted at Mr Arbery: “Stop or I’ll blow your f****** head off!”, the prosecutor said.
“All three of these defendants did everything they did based on assumptions – not on facts, not on evidence,” Ms Dunikoski told the jury.
“And they made decisions in their driveways based on those assumptions that took a young man’s life.”
Mr Arbery’s mother cried out and sobbed as the grainy video of the killing was played to the court.
The prosecutor described how it shows Travis McMichael raise his shotgun as Mr Arbery approaches and tries to run around the opposite side of the truck.
He is then seen stepping in front of the vehicle to confront the fleeing man.
Greg McMichael, a former investigator for the local district attorney, told police they suspected Mr Arbery was a burglar and were trying to make a citizen’s arrest.
He said his son fired in self-defence after Mr Arbery attacked him with his fists and tried to take Travis McMichael’s gun.
The men’s lawyers say the neighbourhood was “on edge” over reports of thefts.
“It is a citizen’s job to help the police, and the law authorises that,” said Robert Rubin, a lawyer representing Travis McMichael.
Mr Rubin described Mr Arbery as “an intruder” who had been recorded four times “plundering around” a house under construction.
He called the footage of his death “a horrible, horrible video” but said his client had acted to protect himself after Mr Arbery refused to stop and lunged towards him and his gun.
“Travis McMichael is acting in self-defence,” he told the jury.
“He did not want to encounter Ahmaud Arbery physically. He was only trying to stop him for the police.”
Prosecutors insist Mr Arbery was just out jogging, had no weapons, keys or wallet on him – and had committed no crimes in the area.
Ms Dunikoski described him as an “avid runner” who often ran in the neighbourhood – less than two miles from his home.
“You’re going to be able to see his Nike shoes,” she told the court, “where he had basically no tread left on them whatsoever”.
The lawyer said the owner of the half-built property – where Mr Arbery had been seen on previous occasions – believed he was using a water source to quench his thirst and that nothing was taken.
The case was largely ignored until the video was leaked online in May last year.
There has been controversy over the the jury, which is made up of 11 white people and one black person.
It took more than two weeks to select from more than 200 people – who were asked in detail what they knew about the case and how many times they had watched the video.
Prosecutors have objected to the final jury and said defence lawyers cut eight potential jurors because they were black.
The judge conceded there appeared to be “intentional discrimination”.
However, he said state law limited his authority to intervene as the defence gave non-racial reasons for excluding the black candidates.
All three defendants have pleaded not guilty to murder, aggravated assault and false imprisonment.
It was a message made public and combined with back-channel briefings we were getting from the White House and the State Department.
Washington’s message to the Israeli government was that the spectacular failure of the Iranian attack, combined with the diplomatic first of having the Jordanians and the Saudis defending Israel, was a victory.
“Take it, don’t retaliate,” was the message they hoped would land. Uncontrolled escalation is just too much of a risk.
But Israel has been ignoring America for a few months now. Biden has frequently found the limits of his influence over Gaza.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
15:02
‘Blasts’ seen in sky above Iran – reports
As this week progressed, it became clear that on this issue too Netanyahu wasn’t going to be bent by Washington, London or anywhere else.
And there were plenty who questioned the wisdom of Biden’s diplomatic directive.
Israel had just faced the biggest aerial assault in its history by a nation committed to its destruction.
“Take the win”?! Really? To many, it sounded like an astonishing appeasement of Iran.
And so, as it dawned on diplomatic visitors to Israel this week that Netanyahu and his war cabinet were going to ignore Biden and hit back, the language began to shift.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:59
Cameron: Israel’s response ‘should be smart’
My understanding is that Western diplomats were given a heads-up by Israel that it was hitting back overnight and with some detail on the type and location of the targets.
But this past week raises questions about the Biden administration’s influence and its strategy.
Biden’s call for no retaliation was very public and echoed by allies. It was driven by the real fear of uncontrolled escalation.
But was it diplomatically smart to make the call so public? Some are asking if that didn’t just undermine Israel’s ability to reestablish deterrence.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Privately call for restraint, maybe. But why publicly?
But more than that, did the public “don’t do it” messaging just expose President Biden to failure and weakness when his directive was simply ignored by Israel?
Perhaps a steady de-escalation through a series of strikes on targets each less significant than the one before it – both sides saving face, both claiming deterrence.
Donald Trump described the hush money case against him as a “mess” after the jury who will decide his fate has been selected.
Leaving the court in New York after proceedings were adjourned for the day, Trump addressed reporters, saying he was supposed to be in states like Georgia, New Hampshire and North Carolina as part of his campaign for the 2024 presidential election.
“[But instead] I’ve been here all day,” he said, labelling the trial as “unfair”.
Trump held up a stack of news stories and editorials that he said were critical of the case while he continued railing against the trial.
“The whole thing is a mess,” he said.
It comes as all 12 jurors have been seated in the first criminal case against a former US president.
Members of the jury include a sales professional, a software engineer, an English teacher and multiple lawyers.
Sky News’ US partner network, NBC News reported there are seven men and five women on the jury.
Advertisement
It comes after lawyers grilled hundreds of potential jurors asking questions on everything from their hobbies and social media posts to their opinion of the former president.
More than half of a second group of prospective jurors were dismissed by Judge Juan Merchan on Thursday after most said they doubted their ability to be fair and impartial.
One juror was also dismissed after she said she “slept on it overnight” and woke up with concerns about her ability to be fair and impartial in the case.
The challenge now is to select six alternate jury members before the trial can move to opening statements, with Mr Merchan hopeful this will be completed on Friday.
Trump is accused of criminally altering business records to cover up a $130,000 (£104,200) payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, real name Stephanie Clifford, during his 2016 election campaign.
His lawyers say the payment was meant to spare himself and his family embarrassment, not to help him win the election.
Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. He could get up to four years in prison if convicted.
The former president faces two other criminal trials accusing him of trying to subvert his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden, and another that accuses him of mishandling classified information after he left the White House in 2021.
He has pleaded not guilty to all charges against him.
The world’s first known combat between a human pilot and a fighter jet controlled by AI has been carried out in California, the US military has said.
In a drill over Edwards Air Force Base, the pair of F-16 fighter jets flew at speeds of up to 1,200mph and got as close as 600 metres during aerial combat, also known as dogfighting.
One was manned, while the other jet was a modified version of the F-16, called the X-62A, or VISTA (variable in-flight simulator test aircraft).
While in flight, the AI algorithm relies on analysing historical data to make decisions for present and future situations, according to the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which carried out the test.
This process is called “machine learning”, and has for years been tested in simulators on the ground, said DARPA, a research and development agency of the US Department of Defense.
In 2020, so-called “AI agents” defeated human pilots in simulations in all five of their match-ups – but the technology needed to be run for real in the air.
Pilots were on board the X-62A in case of emergency, but they didn’t need to revert controls at any point during the test dogfight, which took place in September last year and was announced this week.
The result represents a “transformational moment in aerospace history”, DARPA said in a statement.
It did not reveal which aircraft won the dogfight.
Advertisement
“The potential for autonomous air-to-air combat has been imaginable for decades, but the reality has remained a distant dream up until now, said Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall.
“In 2023, the X-62A broke one of the most significant barriers in combat aviation. This is a transformational moment, all made possible by breakthrough accomplishments of the X-62A ACE team.”
Colonel James Valpiani, a commandant at the US Air Force test pilot school. said: “Dogfighting is a perfect case for the application – machine learning.
“Dogfighting is extremely dangerous. So, if machine learning can operate effectively in an environment as dangerous as air-to-air combat, it has great potential to earn the trust of humans as we look to applications that are less dangerous but equally complex.”
He added: “The X-62A is an incredible platform, not just for research and advancing the state of tests, but also for preparing the next generation of test leaders.
“When ensuring the capability in front of them is safe, efficient, effective and responsible, industry can look to the results of what the X-62A ACE team has done as a paradigm shift.
“We’ve fundamentally changed the conversation by showing this can be executed safely and responsibly.”