Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: how does this happen?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    116

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    This guy should have a slam dunk case for a color of law case.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Lonnie Wilson wrote:
    This guy should have a slam dunk case for a color of law case.
    I'm confused as to why you say this Lonnie. There wasnothing that indicates the officer was acting under color of law. He was off duty and out of uniform. There were no threats of arrest or any civil rights violations that I see.

    Help me out on this one.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    South Western, Washington, USA
    Posts
    86

    Post imported post

    I'm suprised the officer is still employed. It's too bad that a person feels that having your butcher shove your box of prepped meat into your chest to get rid of you after you've been a less than polite person means that the butchers next course of action will be to kill you which is the only time we should legally draw, emminent threat to our or some other persons life

  5. #5
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    RCW 9A.36.50
    (1) A person is guilty of reckless endangerment when he or she recklessly engages in conduct not amounting to drive-by shooting but that creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another person.

    RCW 9.41.230
    (a) Aims any firearm, whether loaded or not, at or towards any human being.

    RCW 9.41.270
    (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

    (3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to or affect the following:
    (c) Any person acting for the purpose of protecting himself or herself against the use of presently threatened unlawful force by another, or for the purpose of protecting another against the use of such unlawful force by a third person;


    I do not see a box of meat thrust into my chest as a threat to my life. Guilty on RCW's 9A.36.50, 9.41.230 and 9.41.270 section 1. Had this been a civilian this would have been before the Grand Jury.




  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Arlington, Washington, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    I was a little weary of his using the "I felt threatened, i mean he's a butcher. And good with knives."





  7. #7
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    joeroket wrote:
    I'm confused as to why you say this Lonnie. There wasnothing that indicates the officer was acting under color of law. He was off duty and out of uniform. There were no threats of arrest or any civil rights violations that I see.

    Help me out on this one.


    From the US DOJ web site:



    [line]


    Summary:

    Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.


    For the purpose of Section 242, acts under "color of law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official's lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

    The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

    TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
    Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.



    [line]


    joerocket, I know or am pretty sure that you already know the code fromreading one of yourprevious posts. I only include it so that others (we have a lot of new members) don't have to look all over for it. Either the officer was actingas a private citizen andwould have (or should have) been charged as a private citizen as mentioned above by M1Gunr -or- he was acting in an official capacity as a police officer, even if off-duty. If the latter, then it would seem that holding a subject at gun point is effectively seizing him, if not threatening assault. It would all come down to what was actually said once the weapon was drawn.If the butcher knew or was told by the officer that he was the police... well, seems to me like it would fit. Just my twocents.

    Note: I worked making thisnon-cop-bashing. This is about an individual with a weapon. Just like you and me. Disputes while you are carrying can happen at any time. How you handle yourself is all important.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Yea I do know what the code says, good call on posting it for those who don't, but I hadn't read anything that indicated that he had implied to the butcher that he was an officer. If he did not then section 242 is not applicable, at least that I can see, regardless if the butcher knew he was an officer beforehand. He would have had to do something during the incident that indicated he was portraying himself as an officer. I do think at the minimum he should have had a 30 day suspension, preferrably termination as we really do not need people like this wearing a badge, and being charged with violating .270.

    It does seem like the thin blue line kicked in on this one. I cannot wrap my head around why they investigated thier own nor why the prosecutor let him walk on the entire incident.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    double tap.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    joeroket wrote:
    double tap.
    Well, as long as you don't collect the brass and reload. We only want factory-new used on this range.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

Posting Permissions

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