• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

CAUGHT RED HANDED - Virginia man arrests peeping tom at gunpoint

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Interesting. I was under the impression, perhaps incorrectly, that Virginians were not permitted to make citizens' arrests.

Was my information incorrect?
 

Hawkflyer

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
3,309
Location
Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
Interesting.  I was under the impression, perhaps incorrectly, that Virginians were not permitted to make citizens' arrests.

Was my information incorrect?
Only for felony violations, committed in your presence. Even then you will likely get sued.

But in this case I think the guy could logically claim he thought the guy was about to invade the home, so he stopped him.

Regards
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
Interesting. I was under the impression, perhaps incorrectly, that Virginians were not permitted to make citizens' arrests.

Was my information incorrect?
Hudson vs. Commonwealth (2003) (holding that "[a]t common law, a private citizen may arrest another for a
breach of the peace committed in his presence. See Gustke, 516
S.E.2d at 291-92; see also Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S.
132, 156-57 (1925) ('In cases of misdemeanor, a peace officer
like a private person has at common law no power of arresting
without a warrant except when a breach of the peace has been
committed in his presence . . . .' . . . The common law in Virginia permits a citizen to effect an arrest for a breach of the peace occurring in his or her
presence").

2. "A breach of the peace is an act of violence or an act likely [size=to produce violence."[b] Taylor v. Commonwealth[/b], 11 Va. App. 649, 653, 400 S.E.2d 794, 796 (1991).

"Barrett nonetheless retained power as a private citizen to make an arrest when, as here, the felony had actually been committed and he had reasonable grounds for believing the person arrested had committed the crime." Tharp v. Commonwealth, 221 Va. 487, 490, 270 S.E.2d 752, ___ (1980).
 

Hawkflyer

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
3,309
Location
Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Mike wrote:
Citizen wrote:
Interesting.  I was under the impression, perhaps incorrectly, that Virginians were not permitted to make citizens' arrests.

Was my information incorrect?
Hudson vs. Commonwealth (2003) (holding that [a]t common law, a private citizen may arrest another for a
breach of the peace committed in his presence.  See Gustke, 516
S.E.2d at 291-92; see also Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S.
132, 156-57 (1925) (" 'In cases of misdemeanor, a peace officer
like a private person has at common law no power of arresting
without a warrant except when a breach of the peace has been
committed in his presence . . . .' . . . The common law in Virginia permits a citizen to effect an arrest for a breach of the peace occurring in his or her
presence").]
[/size]

2.  "A breach of the peace is an act of violence or an act likely to produce violence."  Taylor v. Commonwealth, 11 Va. App. 649, ][/size][size=653, 400 S.E.2d 794, 796 (1991).][/size]

"Barrett nonetheless retained power as a private citizen to make an arrest when, as here, the felony had actually been committed and he had reasonable grounds for believing the person arrested had committed the crime."  Tharp v. Commonwealth, 221 Va. 487, 490, 270 S.E.2d 752, ___ (1980).
]
[/size]

Edited out some of the codes to make the post easier to read.

More on citizens arrest
And this from California state university
On view on Constitutionality

Regards
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Thanks, fellas. I'll study up on these.

I wonder where it fits in for a retail store clerk to hold a shoplifting suspect. (Which no clerk is going to do--he's only going to hold somebody he witnessed shoplifting.)
 

Hawkflyer

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
3,309
Location
Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
Thanks, fellas.  I'll study up on these.

I wonder where it fits in for a retail store clerk to hold a shoplifting suspect. (Which no clerk is going to do--he's only going to hold somebody he witnessed shoplifting.)

The more minor the crime the more clouded the issue becomes. A strict constitutional view would indicate that so long as the crime is committed in the presence of the citizen, he could make an arrest even for littering. Moreover, the implication is that whatever reasonable force that may be required is justified.

One of the cites above even uses this as part of the basis for the RTKABA. The theory is that a citizen MUST have the means to make a citizens arrest, and certainly arms would provide that ability.

I think you will find some of the reading on those cites very interesting.

Also look on the Constitution site for interesting reading on militias and training requirements. Some of that ties into our previous discussions.

But you can still be sued in some places if you arrest someone and they are subsequently acquitted.

Regards
 

openryan

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
1,602
Location
, Indiana, USA
imported post

Okay, but should they have called the police and waited? Probably not, I doubt the kid was planning a robery, maybe he just wanted to see some @$$?

But regardless, what else can you do, try to detain him physically? Then I think you would definately get sued.

Nonetheless I think the neighbor did the right thing.
 
Top