If you record, do NOT do this...

Obi Wan · Sep 13, 2013

As I am figuring all this out, being new-ish to OC,
I seek the advice of the forum.
Which I am very grateful for.

It seems good to record, video / audio / both during a LEO encounter.
I have prepared to do that, using QIK, so that it cannot be erased.
Works great!

However, it seems that how one responds to a request to stop recording
may get one in trouble. :uhoh:

For example:

LEO: I'm going to ask you to stop recording.
LAC: I have every right to record you. (violating the 'no talking' rule)
LEO: Give me that camera right now!
LAC: If you turn that off I will file criminal charges!

RCW 9A.76.180
Intimidating a public servant.

(1) A person is guilty of intimidating a public servant if, by use of a threat,
he or she attempts to influence a public servant's vote, opinion, decision,
or other official action as a public servant.

(2) For purposes of this section "public servant" shall not include jurors.

(3) "Threat" as used in this section means:

(a) To communicate, directly or indirectly, the intent immediately to use force against any person who is present at the time; or

(b) Threats as defined in RCW 9A.04.110.

RCW 9A.04.110
Definitions.

(28) "Threat" means to communicate, directly or indirectly the intent:

(d) To accuse any person of a crime or cause criminal charges to be instituted against any person;

RCW 9A.76.180

(4) Intimidating a public servant is a class B felony.

As I read it, I have just committed a class B felony by threatening to accuse
a public servant of a crime and / or threatening to file criminal charges. :shocker:

Right?

Obi Wan

arab1302 · Sep 13, 2013

Obi Wan said:
As I am figuring all this out, being new-ish to OC,
I seek the advice of the forum.
Which I am very grateful for.

It seems good to record, video / audio / both during a LEO encounter.
I have prepared to do that, using QIK, so that it cannot be erased.
Works great!

However, it seems that how one responds to a request to stop recording
may get one in trouble. :uhoh:

For example:

LEO: I'm going to ask you to stop recording.
LAC: I have every right to record you. (violating the 'no talking' rule)
LEO: Give me that camera right now!
LAC: If you turn that off I will file criminal charges!

RCW 9A.76.180
Intimidating a public servant.

(1) A person is guilty of intimidating a public servant if, by use of a threat,
he or she attempts to influence a public servant's vote, opinion, decision,
or other official action as a public servant.

(2) For purposes of this section "public servant" shall not include jurors.

(3) "Threat" as used in this section means:

(a) To communicate, directly or indirectly, the intent immediately to use force against any person who is present at the time; or

(b) Threats as defined in RCW 9A.04.110.

RCW 9A.04.110
Definitions.

(28) "Threat" means to communicate, directly or indirectly the intent:

(d) To accuse any person of a crime or cause criminal charges to be instituted against any person;

RCW 9A.76.180

(4) Intimidating a public servant is a class B felony.

As I read it, I have just committed a class B felony by threatening to accuse
a public servant of a crime and / or threatening to file criminal charges. :shocker:

Right?

Obi Wan

I am sure it is not a crime to remind him that his actions would be criminal in nature and potentially subject to repercussions. That is not a threat. Merely a statement of fact and a gentle reminder that you are not ignorant.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

Freedom1Man · Sep 13, 2013

arab1302 said:
I am sure it is not a crime to remind him that his actions would be criminal in nature and potentially subject to repercussions. That is not a threat. Merely a statement of fact and a gentle reminder that you are not ignorant.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

I concur. I've made similar statements to state agents who had threatened to steal my property. I will not repeat the words here though.

Grapeshot · Sep 13, 2013

Quoting what the law allows is not communicating a threat.

arentol · Sep 13, 2013

You underlined the word decision. In this context that term is only in reference to official decisions, like the decision of s health inspector to fail your restaurant, or of a police officer to arrest you. It does not apply to all decisions the officer makes, like the decision to tell you to turn off your camera. Telling you to turn off a camera is also almost never an official action because the don't have the legal right to tell you to do so, so that part does not apply.

On a related note, if a police officer tells you to turn the camera off or he will arrest you, or indicates he will take it from you forcibly, that is in fact coercion, and he is the criminal in the situation.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

davidmcbeth · Sep 14, 2013

I've already encountered this somewhat ... when threatening a citizens arrest.

Nope, not a threat because a CA is a legal act and the law is an improper CA is a civil offense, not criminal.

I guess a cop could sue you .. maybe he would get five dollars? So threaten a citizens arrest.

hermannr · Sep 14, 2013

davidmcbeth said:
I've already encountered this somewhat ... when threatening a citizens arrest.

Nope, not a threat because a CA is a legal act and the law is an improper CA is a civil offense, not criminal.

I guess a cop could sue you .. maybe he would get five dollars? So threaten a citizens arrest.

You could not get sued by the cop, that won't fly. However, if the cop does steal your property "under color of law", you can sue him, and his supervisor, union and jurisdiction, under federal law 42 USC 1983

EMNofSeattle · Sep 14, 2013

davidmcbeth said:
I've already encountered this somewhat ... when threatening a citizens arrest.

Nope, not a threat because a CA is a legal act and the law is an improper CA is a civil offense, not criminal.

I guess a cop could sue you .. maybe he would get five dollars? So threaten a citizens arrest.

Oh gosh.... you need to stop with this ******** you're spewing before someone who doesn't vet your dumb ass out tries this crap and gets arrested.

performing a citizens arrest on a police officer in the line of their duties you will be beaten/tazed/sprayed/shot/killed/arrested and charged with assaulting an officer. you will be offered a plea bargain, and probably you're too dumb to take one so you'll go to trial be found guilty and sent up the river. hope your plans for the next years are flexible.

geez, assaulting an officer being a civil offense? file a notice of trespass against your local LEA? sell guns as an FFL to out of state residents? where the hell do you come up with this stuff?

TechnoWeenie · Sep 14, 2013

EMNofSeattle said:
Oh gosh.... you need to stop with this ******** you're spewing before someone who doesn't vet your dumb ass out tries this crap and gets arrested.

performing a citizens arrest on a police officer in the line of their duties you will be beaten/tazed/sprayed/shot/killed/arrested and charged with assaulting an officer. you will be offered a plea bargain, and probably you're too dumb to take one so you'll go to trial be found guilty and sent up the river. hope your plans for the next years are flexible.

geez, assaulting an officer being a civil offense? file a notice of trespass against your local LEA? sell guns as an FFL to out of state residents? where the hell do you come up with this stuff?

Really?

So I can't arrest a cop committing a crime, in my presence, that's disturbing the peace/public?

Interesting. Last time I checked, case law allowed such 'citizen arrests', and I don't see any exemption from being arrested, because you're a cop.

It also says it's against the law to resist an unlawful arrest.

So, let them beat you up and possibly kill you, THEN you can take them to court...

So, if I don't resist, I might get beaten up or killed, but I'm surely not 'getting away'... The cop has made that clear.
If I do resist, I still might get beaten up or killed, but I also have a chance of 'getting away', and taking out a corrupt cop in the process.

How about... you know your skills and abilities, and choose to use or not use them. You know what you do/don't have concealed or on your person. Be prepared for an attack on your person, start carrying objects that can be used as weapons at a moments notice. Get a good pen, a nice metal pen..

I've had WAY too many guns pointed at me in my life, ALL OF THEM by cops, where no threat existed. If I'm met with the threat of lethal force, I will respond accordingly. F(#% what clothing you happen to be wearing that day.

Ever hear the saying 'Don't be afraid of the man who has everything, be afraid of the man who has nothing to lose' ?

Not only is it your RIGHT to resist, it's your damned RESPONSIBILITY to resist. Further, it's EVERYONE'S responsibility to take corrupt cops off the street, in any (legal) way possible. If that means citizens arrest, well, they will probably resist, which they probably will, and most likely with lethal force, and well, at that point it becomes a self defense case, now doesn't it?

Hell, I can legally take his gun from him too, if I wanted. There's a law making it unlawful to disarm a peace officer, but there's also an exemption if that officer is 'engaged in criminal conduct'.

There are laws, then there are morals. This country and its legal system are so corrupt, that even clearly unconstitutional laws are being upheld.

"Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting
officer's life if necessary." Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306

[video=youtube;gD30kLV70CQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gD30kLV70CQ[/video]

davidmcbeth · Sep 14, 2013

All states may not allow a citizen's arrest .. please chk your state law.

MAC702 · Sep 14, 2013

Obi Wan said:
...As I read it, I have just committed a class B felony by threatening to accuse
a public servant of a crime and / or threatening to file criminal charges. :shocker:

Right?

Your use of the word "if" properly means no. You would only accuse him IF he committed the crime. Doesn't the law do the same thing?

sudden valley gunner · Sep 14, 2013

Grapeshot said:
Quoting what the law allows is not communicating a threat.

+1 The most succinct and best answer.

No stating facts and what your recourse will be if a public servant does not do his job within his prescribed boundaries are not committing a crime.

Fairly recently prosecutors and judges tried to use this line of reasoning for people who would hand out flyers or exercise their right of gathering to inform jurors of their right to nullify. This was thrown out by a federal court.

EMNofSeattle · Sep 14, 2013

TechnoWeenie said:
Really?

So I can't arrest a cop committing a crime, in my presence, that's disturbing the peace/public?

Interesting. Last time I checked, case law allowed such 'citizen arrests', and I don't see any exemption from being arrested, because you're a cop.

It also says it's against the law to resist an unlawful arrest.

So, let them beat you up and possibly kill you, THEN you can take them to court...

So, if I don't resist, I might get beaten up or killed, but I'm surely not 'getting away'... The cop has made that clear.
If I do resist, I still might get beaten up or killed, but I also have a chance of 'getting away', and taking out a corrupt cop in the process.

How about... you know your skills and abilities, and choose to use or not use them. You know what you do/don't have concealed or on your person. Be prepared for an attack on your person, start carrying objects that can be used as weapons at a moments notice. Get a good pen, a nice metal pen..

I've had WAY too many guns pointed at me in my life, ALL OF THEM by cops, where no threat existed. If I'm met with the threat of lethal force, I will respond accordingly. F(#% what clothing you happen to be wearing that day.

Ever hear the saying 'Don't be afraid of the man who has everything, be afraid of the man who has nothing to lose' ?

Not only is it your RIGHT to resist, it's your damned RESPONSIBILITY to resist. Further, it's EVERYONE'S responsibility to take corrupt cops off the street, in any (legal) way possible. If that means citizens arrest, well, they will probably resist, which they probably will, and most likely with lethal force, and well, at that point it becomes a self defense case, now doesn't it?

Hell, I can legally take his gun from him too, if I wanted. There's a law making it unlawful to disarm a peace officer, but there's also an exemption if that officer is 'engaged in criminal conduct'.

There are laws, then there are morals. This country and its legal system are so corrupt, that even clearly unconstitutional laws are being upheld.

"Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting
officer's life if necessary." Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306

[video=youtube;gD30kLV70CQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gD30kLV70CQ[/video]

And if you CA a police officer or kill a police officer in self defense you better be able to call Jesus himself as a character witness because you will be arrested and charged and tried. A jury is not going to say "well that cop had no right to inspect techno-weenie's gun to see if it was loaded so TW was ok to beat that officer on the head and cuff him" you'll be found guilty and go to prison.

It's ok to discuss your theoretical theory, but please add the disclaimer, you will go to prison if you try it.

1245A Defender · Sep 14, 2013

Well,,,

EMNofSeattle said:
And if you CA a police officer or kill a police officer in self defense you better be able to call Jesus himself as a character witness because you will be arrested and charged and tried. A jury is not going to say "well that cop had no right to inspect techno-weenie's gun to see if it was loaded so TW was ok to beat that officer on the head and cuff him" you'll be found guilty and go to prison.

It's ok to discuss your theoretical theory, but please add the disclaimer, you will go to prison if you try it.

You have much to learn grasshopper,,,, listen to techno,, you could learn much!

Also, study,,, Bad Elk V. Colorado....

EMNofSeattle · Sep 14, 2013

1245A Defender said:
You have much to learn grasshopper,,,, listen to techno,, you could learn much!

Also, study,,, Bad Elk V. Colorado....

Bad Elk was ruled on over a century ago and didn't deal with an unlawful arrest, it dealt with unlawful force, it helped too that the defendant in that case was a police officer as well...

but this is not a discussion about theoretical legality, it's about REALITY Davidmacbeth asserted that there could be no criminal charge for citizen's arrest of a police officer. he's wrong.

furthermore, you will be charged if you attempt it, and probably convicted.

amzbrady · Sep 15, 2013

Too bad we cant just pull cops over and ticket them. Like when one is speeding or riding the carpool lane alone. What would really be cool is if we could ticket other citizens, like the ones who are driving around with their cell phones stuck to their head.

TechnoWeenie · Sep 15, 2013

EMNofSeattle said:
Bad Elk was ruled on over a century ago and didn't deal with an unlawful arrest, it dealt with unlawful force, it helped too that the defendant in that case was a police officer as well...

but this is not a discussion about theoretical legality, it's about REALITY Davidmacbeth asserted that there could be no criminal charge for citizen's arrest of a police officer. he's wrong.

furthermore, you will be charged if you attempt it, and probably convicted.

Hmmm.

Did you watch the video I posted?

What happens when you have oppressive governments that are 'above the law'?

What happens when lawsuits don't work, and 'officer safety' becomes the buzzword of the day that makes everything 'legal'.

Again, when defense against tyranny becomes unlawful, it's time to become a criminal.

By openly acknowledging that attempting to lawfully arrest a peace officer committing a crime will get you arrested, jailed, and/or killed, you've proven my point for me.

The Jews wanted to 'work within the law' when they were forced to wear stars on their clothing
The Jews wanted to 'work within the law' when they were forced to sell property and close businesses
The Jews wanted to 'work within the law' when they were sent to ghettos
The Jews wanted to 'work within the law' when they were herded into cattle cars to be relocated
Russian political dissidents wanted to 'work within the law' when they were arrested for speaking out.
etc etc etc

At what point do you say '#%&# it, I'm going to do what's RIGHT, I don't care what's LEGAL' ?

That's a personal decision for YOU to make, in YOUR situation.

We now have warrantless wiretapping, of ALL of our communications, including this post and everything on this forum. Phone calls, text messages, emails etc.
We have our very CONSTITUTION being scrapped, because the 2nd amendment doesn't apply, clearly, only to muskets.
We have our 4th amendment being tossed in the trash, see above.

We now have the FIRST amendment under attack, as lawmakers are trying to pass a law defining what a 'journalist' is, so if you're a blogger or something, you're not a 'legitimate journalist', and have NO RIGHT to post 'news', so they can take down your blog because you 'have no right to post it'.......

You wanna wait until they start knocking on doors, or until some other 'terrorist attack' like Boston goes down and they decide that a city should stay locked down 'for everyones safety'.........that's on you.

5 years ago I would've been called a nutjob, or a loonie.. Now look at the news, look at our country, and tell me I'm wrong. Look at our gov't saying 'meh, oh well, it's national security, we're doing it, f%*# you, you can't stop us'

Grapeshot · Sep 15, 2013

TechnoWeenie said:
Hmmm.

Did you watch the video I posted?

What happens when you have oppressive governments that are 'above the law'?

What happens when lawsuits don't work, and 'officer safety' becomes the buzzword of the day that makes everything 'legal'.

Again, when defense against tyranny becomes unlawful, it's time to become a criminal.

By openly acknowledging that attempting to lawfully arrest a peace officer committing a crime will get you arrested, jailed, and/or killed, you've proven my point for me.

--snipped--

At what point do you say '#%&# it, I'm going to do what's RIGHT, I don't care what's LEGAL' ?

While I understand and relate to the passion surrounding our rights, freedoms and the attacks on them, that is only marginally within the purview of OCDO - the site is dedicated to promoting and defending OC. It is not intended to provide a political platform for all else.

More pointedly, we do not promote, espouse, or suggest that one act illegally - in violation of law. The adherence to that principal is important enough that a specific rule defines the intent beyond question.

davidmcbeth · Sep 15, 2013

Grapeshot said:
More pointedly, we do not promote, espouse, or suggest that one act illegally - in violation of law. The adherence to that principal is important enough that a specific rule defines the intent beyond question.

I don't know of ANY website that does promote, espouse, or suggest that one act illegally.

Websites may not police their boards for such activities but they do not openly promote illegal activity.

Boilerplate notice I guess ... of course some would post to do dastardly deeds I guess...like voting democratic !

EMNofSeattle · Sep 15, 2013

We now have warrantless wiretapping, of ALL of our communications, including this post and everything on this forum.

you mean someone with a computer can access OCDO and read all the posts on the forums?

bastards....

If you record, do NOT do this...

Regular Member

New member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

New member

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Banned

Regular Member