tvc184

The police have authorities that civilians do not have. You say things are the same when they aren’t. You claim that these men were detaining until the police arrived. It is a use of legalese but they can’t detain to wait for the police. They can arrest if it guys GA law. You can claim that is what happened but the state attorneys disagree with you. The law on shoplifting are different than other crimes. Texas Law says that a CA must be a felony or a breach of the peace. BUT.... in a completely different chapter it says that “any person” has the authority to prevent the consequences of theft. I don’t feel like looking up GA law at this moment but you speak in general terms and what if scenarios when there are sometimes several different parts of the law in question. As an example from Texas law, it is the legal case law rulings from the SCOTUS and other courts from the Fourth Amendment that probable cause is needed to justify an arrest. Couple that with Texas law in CA of a felony or breach of the peace only... yet any person can do s shoplifter with a “reasonable ground” to believe that theft has taken place. You have to look at all of the laws that apply, not cherry pick them when using examples. Remember the legal concept of lex specialis derogat legi generali.

If the retired cop has any money in his retirement account, I’ll bet he won’t have any when this is over, no matter the outcome unless a go fund me account gives him some. Even if he beats the rap, he will be penniless and won’t be able to go back to his old job. About the best he can hope for being is a free destitute..... And what did the community policing cop text.... let the retired cop handle it?

Aaaaaand now the FBI is investigating it......

No, you are comparing apples to Dodge Durangos. The third guy is not indicted for the video. He is indicted (from what I have read) for assisting, not videoing. Video in a public place is lawful. Also, officers have the authority to detain by force in order to investigate. Civilians do not. In IL v. Wardlow the SCOTUS ruled that seeing the cops in a high crime area and bolting away is enough reasonable suspicion to detain a person without violating the Fourth Amendment. I am not sure what no crime to jog or flee refers to....

No, it’s not all fair game. It has to be relevant to the trial however, if a defendant (or anyone) takes the stand, you can impeach his testimony by trying to show that he is untruthful. For the guys to claim self defense in this case, I believe they are going to have to take the stand to explain their actions. They obviously don’t have to by law and their lawyers can try to make the case without it but it will be difficult with what I think the state attorney is going to bring. Dropping a case or being found not guilty has nothing to do with a lawful arrest. Probable cause is a way different standard than proof beyond s reasonable doubt. Yes I have seen officers sued and successfully. Deadly force is defined (at least in Texas) by statute. It isn’t merely “generally accepted”. DF used on a person is actual use of deadly force but the threat of deadly force (in Texas) with a deadly Weapon can get you up to 99 years in the hoosegow according who you threaten. Up to 20 years for everyone else. That is the mere threat and not even use. i disagree with your struggle over the weapon makes the use of DF would be “completely useable beyond question”. Welllll.... not so much. If a person displays a weapon and/or threatens DF when it isn’t lawful, he loses his use of self defense. I will quote Texas law (as an example as I don’t like looking at GA) on self defense not being lawful. In your terminology, if a mortal was initiated by the deceased. No, if the shooter had no legal standing for displaying the shotgun, morally initiating the struggle is legal by Arbery. He has just as much right of self defense and stand your ground against an unlawful use of force including the threat. This is Texas law when self defense is not lawful: >>>>>(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and (3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used. (b) The use of force against another is not justified: (1) in response to verbal provocation alone;<<<< Does not provoke... if the shooter had no lawful use of a shotgun to stop a man merely running (even away), then the shooter provoked the incident. Also, no defense when engaged in any crime other than C misdemeanor or in other words, a traffic citation. So if brandishing a firearm without the lawful use of self defense is a crime in GA, again (and I bet it is), the shooter broke the law and again, loses lawful self defense. So, you can’t commit a crime and then claim self defense. As my questions were, was an arrest lawful under GA law and was the display of a weapon to make that arrest in that situation lawful. If not lawful on either, case closed. If the shooter displayed the shotgun unlawfully, it is Arbery that had the lawful right of self defense, not the shooter. I am not sure what the Michael Slager case has to do with this except even an officer can’t guess what “may” happen. If so the police could legally shoot anyone because they “may” do something.

I disagree on several points. Yes you can sue for unlawful arrest. I don’t that GA or any state laws allow bringing things like a confrontation with the police. Those types of evidence can normally only come out in a punishment phase of s trial and only after a conviction. Arbery can’t claim self defense because he is dead but the DA will be able to bring up self defense laws. Even if Arbery has no right of self defense, that doesn’t negate murder. If you are in Walmart arguing with someone and he bops you in the nose, you would have a hard time claiming self defense by deadly force. A bloody nose doesn’t justify getting shot. It doesn’t matter if he was jogging or fleeing. Neither justifies deadly force.

And if the answer to either of my first questions is “no”, we need not proceed any further down the list. If the answer to either is no, the Murder charge is valid. If both are yes, more details are needed but the first two are critical. No valid crime to justify a CA or not having the required knowledge to justify such an arrest and thesec guys need to make the best plea possible. I am not saying those are the facts as I don’t know (nor anyone else reading this) but if you can’t get past both of those, these guys are rightfully in deep trouble.

Some of these side bar arguments and questions are mostly a diversion to prove one way or the other. It didn’t matter if there is a video showing Arbery arguing with the cops two years earlier. It doesn’t matter if he wasn’t completely stable mentally, it doesn’t matter about race relations and who has the most violent community, it doesn’t matter if he was jogging and so on. What matters is GA law on citizen arrest (CA), what the required knowledge is to justify such an arrest and what force or threats can be used. These are the questions that in my opinion matter. Was Arbery committing a crime that GA law allows for a CA? If that existed, did the men have the required direct knowledge of the crime? What force does GA law allow for a CA and is displaying a firearm lawful without provocation of deadly force by the suspect? If the men unlawfully displayed a weapon to apprehend Arbery for a non-violent, did Arbery have the right of self defense and stand your ground against the men? Short of knowing these answers......

I agree completely on video. I have intervened when I have seen officers trying to drop someone from making a video. The only issue is if the person gets too far into a scene. When a person is so close as to interfere with an officer, that isn’t legal but not because of the video. I think it was earlier in this thread or maybe even another forum but I said that the video guy was reported to have take post in the attempted apprehension of Arbery. It was not from taking video. The three men were reported to have been all together in trying to arrest Arbery. Of course that is just from reports that I read which isn’t evidence In what GA calls immediate knowledge, I think Texas calls “in his presence”. Texas law says an arrest can be made if within his presence or view. Obviously within view is to actually witness the crime but I think in his presence means close enough to know it is happening right now. Like a person hears glass break and turns a corner and sees a man standing next to a broken window and a hammer is on the ground. The crime wasn’t within view but it was within the person’s “presence”. I think that the GA law is similar. Immediate knowledge means you are close enough to know that a crime has been committed. If aneighbor calls you 5 minutes later about a possible crime, is that immediate? I think not but I don’t feel like looking up GA case law.

Not sure what you are complaining about. I just answered the questions you put out there.

I answered that a few posts ago. There is huge difference between a routine traffic stop and one where the officer it stopping a suspected armed felon. When grandma is stopped for speeding, the cops count pull guns and put her on the ground. Don’t try and confuse the issues. If you want SCOTUS law, I will be glad to provide it with at least 3 unanimous rulings.

From what I read about stop and frisk, it was completely legal. Officers can detain someone for reasonable suspicion. It has to be linked to a specific crime. That came from SCOTUS in Terry v. Ohio. Detectives McFadden saw what he thought was 4 guys casing a store in order to rob it. They took turns walking back and forth, looked into the store to see how many customers, etc. When they all started walking toward the store together, McFadden moved in thinking it was about to happen. He pushed the guys against the wall and patted them down and I think 3 had guns. Now such a contract is called a Terry stop or a Terry frisk it is still the standard to justify a detention by law enforcement. All that NYPD did was tell the patrol officers to get off their butts, out of their patrol cars and start stopping suspicious people. They did. The problem with this and such programs is the belief by some police administrations to use traffic stops and Terry stops as a measure of success or performance. That is a folly in my opinion. When you start rewarding officers for contacts, they may start stretching the reason for the contact. Stop and frisk is what cops get paid to do. I don’t think there should be any reward at al for doing your job however. The laziest cop who stops no one, might all of a sudden find hundreds of “criminals” in his midst if he thinks it might get him that job in detectives and off of patrol. Officers should be commended for the quality of their cases, not quantity. in my opinion

One word answer: maybe Explanation: There simply isn’t enough public information. Profiling in itself is not illegal even by the police. In fact the police get paid to profile. Racial profiling is unlawful as a reason to detain someone.

And many of those detentions are not lawful. Saying magic words like you aren’t under arrest but this is for my protection is not legal. The lawful reasons to handcuff are probable cause of a crime or a situation bad enough to justify the intrusion such as a felony traffic stop of a suspected armed robbery suspect. If it was lawful to handcuff someone by just saying the words you are not under arrest, then everyone the cops talk to could be handcuffed.

There should be no middle ground on constitutional rights. There is no give and take.

Be should have never been in handcuffs. Releasing him later doesn’t right the wrong. I would like to see if he had body cam video. If the officer is really demanding that he be called sergeant, he has serious issues and might need to seek a different profession. We don’t have all the facts but from the appearance of it, this looks like an unlawful detention. Now,, waiting for the other side if the story is one exists....

That isn’t correct for the gas salesman unless he knew that they were going to commit a crime with it. It is intent. The video guy took intentional action as part of the incident. He wasn’t a guy on the porch who happened to catch the action. In the example I gave it was two guys breaking into cars and one guy selling it to a third who knew the property was stolen. They all knowingly took part in crimes. The guy selling gas had no clue. Zimmerman complied with the dispatcher (who has no authority to give him an order). Legally it wouldn’t have mattered but Zimmerman complied. i don’t think the state is reaching however without actually knowing the evidence, it is a complete guess. Let’s play what if..... what if 3 guys see Arbery prowling around. It is suspicious but not a crime. So the three get together and say, let’s teach this guy a lesson. Or perhaps they say, we don’t know what he is up to but maybe he is the guy that has been committing crimes in this area. In either case they have no probable cause to arrest. I read the GA citizen arrest law and it says witnesses a crime, not suspects a crime and can detain like an officer. So the video guy in either case says, great and I will video and tell you where he runs. Under that scenario, video guy is directly involved in the outcome. If so, it sure isn’t reaching. If “all” the guy did was video and took no part in the attempted detention, it is a reach.

No and there is likely no need. If like Texas, lesser included crimes are served concurrently. Let’s say a guy is convicted of Murder and then unlawful restraint in the same incident. He gets 50 years on the Murder and 5 on the unlawful restraint. He doesn’t do 5 years after the Murder sentence. The first 5 years of his time is the first 5 if Murder and the entire time for the restraint. Like locally you might here a guy get three 10 year sentences. That is 30 years but he will only have to do 10. All three sentences will be served at the same time. What I suspect will happen is that the state attorney might use the unlawful detention (if they determine that it was) as the evidence needed for the Murder charge. If no authority to arrest them no lawful use of force.

From what I have read, he was on the phone with the shooters, telling them which way Arbery was running, etc. To that extent, he helped track Arbery down. That makes him part of the murder charge. I don’t feel like looking up GA law at this hour but I might compare Texas law. There are two ways this could be Murder (or any crime) in Texas. If a person took any part in any crime, he can be charged in the crime. Texas doesn’t use the law of accomplices. If you take any part, you are responsible for the entire crime. So if the two guys charged with Murder were assisted in any way by the video guy, he can be charged and that could include a phone call. The other way is organized crime. In Texas Organized Crime requires at least 3 people who participate in certain crimes. Unlike being charged directly with taking part in a crime (like making a phone call), in OC the parties can be at an at an arm length relationship and the parties don’t even have to know one another. For example if two guys break into cars and one of them sells the stolen property to w third guy. There one that helps break into cars doesn’t know who is buying the property. The one that buys the knowingly stolen property doesn’t even know the name of the guy that helps his friend. So it doesn’t matter if they know each other or how many people are involved or exactly what crimes are committed. If three or more people end up in the same enterprise, they can all be charged.

Absolutely. But I don’t have to answer for Tmir Rice, lynching or anything else that I had no part in.

I have read almost every witness statement from the Michael Brown case, looked at the crime scene photos and seen the diagrams of the bullet wounds. I have a very good friend who was (since retired) the supervisor in charge of one of the MO state police homicide unit. I can assure you that the hands up, don’t shoot was fabricated. Some of the statements were intended to be lies but on being re-interviewed many who started that Brown had his hands up later started basically, “well, that’s what I heard”.

Each state has different laws on the way that cases are presented. In many controversial media trials they often accuse the DA of overcharging, thereby guaranteeing an acquittal. Like they knew that they could not get the death penalty case proven but they went with Capital Murder anyway, knowing that the jury would acquire whereas a manslaughter case might have gotten a conviction and 20 year sentence. Or just the opposite, the DA might go for a lesser charge just to make sure of a conviction when a higher charge might have been valid In Texas usually lesser included crimes are given as options to the jury. Like a DA might go for Capital Murder but the jury didn’t believe that the DA proved another felony (robbery, sexual assault, etc.) but did prove the cause of death. The jury could find the the defendant guilty of murder and not Capital. They might even go down to Manslaughter. The judge in his charge/instructions to the jury can give lesser included offenses that can be considered. So I don’t think the bar too high is valid in Texas According to cases that I have seen in the media, apparently some states don’t give that option. GA? No clue. Teaching at the police academy I usually give a scenario and ask all crimes (lesser included) that they can come up with just to make them think of the elements of a crime. Here is the scenario... A man walks into a convenience store, demands money, gets some out of the register and then shoots and kills the clerk. Obviously the DA will go with Capital Murder but did the guy commit any other crimes. Murder, Aggravated Assault with Deadly Weapon, Agg Assault with Serious Bodily Injury, Assault with Bodily Injury, Assault by Offensive Contact, Assault by Threat, Agg Robbery, Robbery, Theft, Unlawful Carrying Weapon on Alcohol Licenses Premises, Disorderly Conduct Discharging Firearm in Public Place, Disorderly Conduct Displaying Weapon Calculated to Alarm.......

I hardly ever speak of experience. Anyone is allowed to have an opinion. When someone tells me that I don’t understand community policing because of something read in the internet, sometimes it seems appropriate. I can’t be losing a debate because I am not in one. I am merely pointing out usual police policies and responses. A debate might be if those policies or practices are good. I haven’t disengaged from anything. Here is what matters in this case.... Did the two men arrested witness a felony? If so they can make a citizen arrest under GA law. I have read the GA law and I saw nothing that justifies a detention by a civilian in order to question a person that was in a suspicious circumstance, particularly with firearms. The police can, civilians can’t Arbery’s past history has no bearing on the case. A video of him arguing with cops two years earlier doesn’t justify deadly force or a detention Him in the area or in that house under construction previoy doesn’t matter. Having a cop text for the neighbors to call the retired cop doesn’t matter. Again, did they witness s felony? If not, they can make no citizen arrest. The rest is just fluff to distract by one side or the other. Does GA law allow for a civilian to draw a weapon on an apparently unarmed person to make an arrest, just in case? The local DAs that knew the suspect or his family, said they saw no case. The state police were called in and it took about 45 seconds to say, what the heck was the DA thinking. I think this will go to trial. I think the guys may get off because of the way the law reads. In Texas as an example of self defense, if self defense is brought up in a trial, the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that self defense was not lawful in that circumstance. In other words, the defendant doesn’t have to prove that he had the right of self defense, the DA has to prove that he didn’t. So a jury could feel 80% likely that murder was committed but that isn’t beyond a reasonable doubt. Texas law on a defense to prosecution says that if any reasonable count exists, a person must be acquitted. Is GA the same? It is probably similar.

The ones that actually look at case, typically agree. Ones that just read headlines.... I have talked with officers (naturally) about high profile cases and has some disagree.... until you show them other evidence and then it is, “oh, that changes everything”. If you question is, am I the guy that just disagrees with everything then the answer is no. I fall in the typical police paradigm. I comment on many forums and usually qualify my statement as.... if the situation is as presented in the media. IF this is true, this is the answer. For what it is worth, I get calls every day, including on my days off, to give opinions on a case, sometimes from ongoing crime scenes.

Partnership does not mean turning law enforcement authority to civilians. I am not sure where you drew that conclusion from that general community policing statement. In fact most community policing rules is for citizens to not be armed and to not take action except to be the eyes and ears of the cops. It is not and never has been... call the neighbor and let him take care if it. If you are a police officer, I would like to know what your experience is that led you to that conclusion. As far as me being part of the problem, I am in my 37th year as a police officer. I have been involved in 5 shooting incidents. I have been treated at the hospital about 10 times line of duty injuries including having my eyebrow glued back together in two places after being assaulted with a pipe during an arrest. I was chosen to be one of the first federally funded community policing officers in the nation in the mid 1990s when Clinton signed the community policing bill into law. I spent 10 years on SWAT with 8 a team leader. I have been declared an expert in gangs by a judge in a trial. I spent 3 years in detectives and 3 years in command of the gang unit. I have been to over 150 Homicide scenes and was the supervisor in charge of several of them. I have testified in front of a grand jury in an officer involved fatal shooting. I currently teach the Penal Code, arrest-search and seizure (Constitution Law) and firearms at the police academy. I have over 50 commendations including one from the US Marshal’s Service for helping to capture an escaped prisoner from CA who was about to shoot a deputy marshal and a few medals. i could go an but if you think I am soft on criminals and am part of the problem.......