I have a strong feeling, however, that the NYPD will not allow themselves to be cuffed by a bunch of protesters. Despite this, however, OWS is not backing down from their citizen's arrest.
Here are several examples from Twitter.
Arrest them all:
Arrest the NYPD:
Not knowing when to use apostrophes:
Citizen's arrest:
And from OWS's website:
Technically then, across the country couldn't us as citizens arrest individual officers who are so blatantly disrupting the peace and brutalizing the people?And (using Wikipedia as a reference):
So, I'm wondering if it might be possible to perform a citizen's arrest if these kind of events happen in the future.Unfortunately for OWS, but as expected, the facts do not back them up. In particular, in Hudson v. Commonwealth, it was decided that the definition of a citizen's arrest is as follows:
Some quick research on Wiki says that any citizen (in most states) can arrest someone for committing a felony.
Is a felony occurring during these break ups? How do we enforce or leverage a citizen's arrest?
[A]n arrest of a private person by another private person on grounds that a public offense was committed in the arrester's presence.In other words, an average person can arrest another average person, but they cannot arrest a police officer.
Please bookmark!
I wonder if it will Occur to anyone reading those incitements to do citizen arrests of police officers that those incitements are not on their side or have the least concern about those attempting arrests personal safety. Possibilities:someone wants martyrs for the cause, someone wants more overtime, someone is wants and excuse to really rough up and hurt the OWS hippies, somebody want's the easy reporing gig to continue.
ReplyDeleteand so on and so forth.
>In other words, an average person can arrest another average person, but they cannot arrest a police officer.
ReplyDeleteIncorrect. A public servant engaged in sedition (trampling of first amendment rights - call it what it is) forfeits any protection that may come with their position.
Anon, I specifically mentioned the court decision. While I appreciate the comment, you are incorrect
ReplyDelete