The narrative that he was “jogging” implies a lot of things that aren’t in evidence. He “took off” when someone observed him at the house under construction, which he had previously visited several times. As far as I know, no one has testified that he was a habitual jogger. It’s not really relevant to the case but it is more fair to say that the defendants observed him “fleeing”. You might not be able to perceive the difference via dress, pace, and demeanor on occasion, but that is more the exception than the rule. Again, it doesn’t matter because the defendants don’t have any evidence that he had committed any crime. He might have been frightened by a wasp, for example.