Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Resisting unlawful arrest upheld in NY

  1. #1
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077

    Resisting unlawful arrest upheld in NY

    The judge, Steven M. Statsinger, said in his ruling that the police had mishandled a call to a medical emergency and ended up injuring an already sick man

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/17/ny...th-police.html

    "Nineteen hours after her arrest, Ms. LaFont was brought before a judge in Manhattan Criminal Court to face charges of obstructing governmental administration and harassment. The prosecutor on duty offered her a common deal for people who have tussles with the police: plead guilty to disorderly conduct and be released with a penalty of “time served.”

    Ms. LaFont refused. “I didn’t believe I did anything wrong,” she said. Over the next months, she also turned down offers from prosecutors to drop the charges in return for meeting certain conditions. What she wanted, she said, was exoneration."


    *****

    I have yet to see a member here support the resistance of a legal arrest. There has been much conversation of resisting unlawful arrest. While the information provided in this story is very limited, it might appear that at least one judge viewed the resistance this couple put up to what could have killed this heart surgery patient husband was just. Another case where a distressed citizen's call for help was turned into a worse threat than the medical emergency that initiated the call.
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  2. #2
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Interesting.

    I focus on unlawful arrest, because if there is due process and a warrant arrests may be lawful.

    Good on this woman and good for the judge.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...=en&as_sdt=4,7

    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...=en&as_sdt=4,7

    2 cases in CT that describe resisting in our state ... maybe similar in NY

    Have the right to resist someone entering your home, just not too much ... nice huh?

    One should know what they can and cannot do.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 01-17-2014 at 08:23 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Interesting.

    I focus on unlawful arrest, because if there is due process and a warrant arrests may be lawful.

    Good on this woman and good for the judge.
    Which, of course, still doesn't mean it may be right or just; merely "lawful", for the little that's worth.

  5. #5
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    Which, of course, still doesn't mean it may be right or just; merely "lawful", for the little that's worth.
    Yep. Maybe I should use "legal" because according to real law not all legalities are lawful....
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Nice, if not pleasantly surprising, prose from the NY Times. Anyone got a link to ruling stating that the resistance was upheld. I dunno, but, for some reasaon, I kinda like facts.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  7. #7
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Nice, if not pleasantly surprising, prose from the NY Times. Anyone got a link to ruling stating that the resistance was upheld. I dunno, but, for some reasaon, I kinda like facts.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>
    The link wasn't posted for your approval. It was posted to stimulate conversation. You are free to move on to threads more worthy of your attention. Don't read into that any apology for the stories deficiencies. I qualified the lack of details in the OP. You may feel free to take yourself and your cynicism and piss off.
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by JTHunter View Post
    Good for this gutsy lady!
    Lucky, gutsy lady I would say. Glad for her too.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuller Malarkey View Post
    The link wasn't posted for your approval. It was posted to stimulate conversation. You are free to move on to threads more worthy of your attention. Don't read into that any apology for the stories deficiencies. I qualified the lack of details in the OP. You may feel free to take yourself and your cynicism and piss off.
    Well, when rational adults post a thread title asserting that "Resisting unlawful arrest [was] upheld in NY," they back up that assertion. You clearly don't.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,153
    I wonder if JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr. might have lied? Unfortunately the NY Law Journal is tightly paywalled so more than its confirmatory headline can't be seen by other than subscribers.

    Fetch boy, fetisch.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    "sui generis"

    Citizens of NYC should not look to this ruling for future relief.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    I wonder if JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr. might have lied? Unfortunately the NY Law Journal is tightly paywalled so more than its confirmatory headline can't be seen by other than subscribers.

    Fetch boy, fetisch.
    Then we should not repeat the headline with abandon. Honesty demands that we check our facts, or qualify them: "NY Times says that resisting unlawful arrest was upheld in NY."

    As of right now, we have no idea whether it was or not.

  13. #13
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    There was no "unlawful" arrest. The sick dude was determined to be nutbag by the cop at that time, right or wrong. The wife "assaulted" a cop, another lawful arrest. the judge basiclly states that this case is so far out there that justice would not be served by prosecuting these two.

    Folks in NYC should not rely on this case for future relief. Also, if ya don't believe the "facts" given in the story then ya'll have to wait for the trial to be concluded to get the truth of that matter.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Ffld co.
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    "sui generis"

    Citizens of NYC should not look to this ruling for future relief.
    correct. the couple are members of the privileged class and received judicial respect/protection because of it. this is not recognition of lawful/legal resistance. the woman committed an unlawful assault on the officer and her arrest was proper.
    Last edited by CT Barfly; 01-20-2014 at 11:12 AM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,153
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  16. #16
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by CT Barfly View Post
    correct. the couple are members of the privileged class and received judicial respect/protection because of it. this is not recognition of lawful/legal resistance. the woman committed an unlawful assault on the officer and her arrest was proper.
    I suspect that the judge is way smarter than a great many folks. He saw this case as a potential for a jury to actually set a precedent that would allow a citizen to decide when it may be justified to interdict a cop who is arresting someone.

    No judge is gunna let mere citizens decide what is reasonable cop behavior in any given situation.

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I suspect that the judge is way smarter than a great many folks. He saw this case as a potential for a jury to actually set a precedent that would allow a citizen to decide when it may be justified to interdict a cop who is arresting someone.

    No judge is gunna let mere citizens decide what is reasonable cop behavior in any given situation.
    Good point!

    Of course some believe the judicial system is to be the final arbitration.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •