• 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.

GMU Police Dept. jurisdiction

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
imported post

2a4all wrote:
...
So how do we defend against this mode of tyranny?

I was a History major in college. And from that, I learned one important thing: the only way in which people have substantially changed in the last eight thousand years of recorded history is that we have learned to move bigger and heavier things farther and faster. It's them humans. If we could just get rid of all the humans, the Earth would be just fine.

My father told me that Franklin Roosevelt had often told him when he was little, that everyone has his own agenda; that he will do what he can to give effect to his own agenda; and that he can be bought, manipulated, and sold according to his agenda.

Here's the point: you give someone power, it had better be the right person; one whose agenda is in line with yours. If you don't know how to select the people to whom you give power well, you will only be implementing someone else's agenda.

We humans do not have a good record for selecting people whom we wish to exercise power over us. The only exception I can think of is the story represented in the films, "The Seven Samurai" and the remake, "The Magnificent Seven". Normally, when the peasants in the village hire gunslingers to rid the area of bandits, all they do is bring in a new bunch of bandits.

My personal view is that each of us must see to his own spiritual development first and above all else; the heathens and barbarians are going to keep on doing what they've always done. "Seek ye first the kingdom of Heaven, and all these things will be added unto you."

But don't forget to keep your head (and your butt) down and out of the line of fire.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
imported post

2a4all wrote:
user wrote:
Vanns40 wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote:
peter nap wrote:
Most Departments limit their Officers due mostly to Budget and Manpower allocation.

Anyone can make a citizens arrest for a felony or BOP.
Now, the interesting thing is that if they make the arrest as a Citizen, the constitutional limits on search and seizure, don't apply.

Somewhere here, I posted case law about two off duty airport cops that caught a DUI at a stoplight, while in one of their private cars.

They searched the man and car while waiting for the local cops and found drugs. He appealed the conviction and the court ruled that the constitutional limits protected the citizen from the government, not another Citizen.

Now the question I have is, if I'm pulled by a Cop out of his venue and decide I don't want to be searched and knock him on his azz....am I guilty of felony assault of a Police Officer or simple assault of a Citizen ?:?
Good question. Hmmm I can't recall a case of this occurring although I do remember someone bringing this up during legal class. The instructor stated that if you are acting as a citizen, then most likely you would be charged as such. A commonwealth attorney may charge with the felony and let the court decide.

Someone questioned above about LEO's out of jurisdiction and DUI. DUI's are obviously breach of peace misdemeanors and would be ok to detain. Most likely the officer would just detain until the local LEO's can come.

Can you cite what case law that allowed the officers to search if they were acting as citizens? That is a surprise.
IF, he identifies himself as a police officer AND he is certified in the Commonwealth of VA AND, you knock him on his *ss, you are guilty of a felony. IF however, he identifies himself as a police officer and he is NOT certified by the Commonwealth, HE is guilty of impersonating a police officer and YOU can have him arrested!

I seldom offer any opinions on this subject, because it's one in which you basically have to be right - there's no "good faith" or "reasonable belief" defense.

That said, I would point out that I'm a "lawyer" everywhere because I've been graduated from an accredited school of law. But I'm only an "attorney" in Virginia, because that's where I'm licensed (though that gets me into certain federal courts as well). Same principle applies to cops. Unless there's a statute that says so, a cop's territorial authority pretty much ends at the borders of the state, county, city, or town he's working for. A Fairfax County police officer has no greaterauthority in Dinwiddie than he does in Georgia. He's not a "law enforcement officer" in those places.

Point two, and the one that's potentially dangerous. In Virginia, every person has an absolute right to resist an unlawful arrest, and to use such degree of force as is necessary to do so, including deadly force. Now, consider that Title 18.2 and 19.2 of the Virginia Code cover crimes and criminal procedure. I can't even remember whether that's in two or three volumes, total, but I can tell you that I don't have it all memorized, though I've got a better handle on it than most attorneys. And it changes every year in a couple of dozen ways which are not catalogued anywhere. I would not trust my own knowledge of the law, absent an eggregious and blatant violation by a cop, to feel justified in resisting.

That guy, Anderson, I think his name was, in Roanoke who was arrested because he didn't want to talk about his gun, could have lawfully resisted arrest to the point of shooting at least one of the cops in my opinion. But I'm pretty sure he'd have wound up dead if he'd done so. And that's because the cops would have murdered him in retaliation. No question in my mind. His family might have had a cause of action for wrongful death, but where's the witnesses? And who's going to prosecute the cops for murder, much less abduction?

The moral of the story is this: you may be able to knock him on his arse, and you may be able to have him arrested, from a strictly legal point of view. But as a practical matter, you're likely to wind up dead and the cop will not be arrested, even if you can find someone willing to take the complaint.
So how do we defend against this mode of tyranny?

Thank you User. That was an excellent answer.

For the benefit of some of the more energetic members here, it was also an academic question.

Knocking Police Officers on their posteriors, no matter what venue they're in, ranks right up there with Rattlesnake Kissing. It should be avoided:lol:
 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
imported post

user wrote:
Vanns40 wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote:
peter nap wrote:
Most Departments limit their Officers due mostly to Budget and Manpower allocation.

Anyone can make a citizens arrest for a felony or BOP.
Now, the interesting thing is that if they make the arrest as a Citizen, the constitutional limits on search and seizure, don't apply.

Somewhere here, I posted case law about two off duty airport cops that caught a DUI at a stoplight, while in one of their private cars.

They searched the man and car while waiting for the local cops and found drugs. He appealed the conviction and the court ruled that the constitutional limits protected the citizen from the government, not another Citizen.

Now the question I have is, if I'm pulled by a Cop out of his venue and decide I don't want to be searched and knock him on his azz....am I guilty of felony assault of a Police Officer or simple assault of a Citizen ?:?
Good question. Hmmm I can't recall a case of this occurring although I do remember someone bringing this up during legal class. The instructor stated that if you are acting as a citizen, then most likely you would be charged as such. A commonwealth attorney may charge with the felony and let the court decide.

Someone questioned above about LEO's out of jurisdiction and DUI. DUI's are obviously breach of peace misdemeanors and would be ok to detain. Most likely the officer would just detain until the local LEO's can come.

Can you cite what case law that allowed the officers to search if they were acting as citizens? That is a surprise.
IF, he identifies himself as a police officer AND he is certified in the Commonwealth of VA AND, you knock him on his *ss, you are guilty of a felony. IF however, he identifies himself as a police officer and he is NOT certified by the Commonwealth, HE is guilty of impersonating a police officer and YOU can have him arrested!

I seldom offer any opinions on this subject, because it's one in which you basically have to be right - there's no "good faith" or "reasonable belief" defense.

That said, I would point out that I'm a "lawyer" everywhere because I've been graduated from an accredited school of law. But I'm only an "attorney" in Virginia, because that's where I'm licensed (though that gets me into certain federal courts as well). Same principle applies to cops. Unless there's a statute that says so, a cop's territorial authority pretty much ends at the borders of the state, county, city, or town he's working for. A Fairfax County police officer has no greaterauthority in Dinwiddie than he does in Georgia. He's not a "law enforcement officer" in those places.

Point two, and the one that's potentially dangerous. In Virginia, every person has an absolute right to resist an unlawful arrest, and to use such degree of force as is necessary to do so, including deadly force. Now, consider that Title 18.2 and 19.2 of the Virginia Code cover crimes and criminal procedure. I can't even remember whether that's in two or three volumes, total, but I can tell you that I don't have it all memorized, though I've got a better handle on it than most attorneys. And it changes every year in a couple of dozen ways which are not catalogued anywhere. I would not trust my own knowledge of the law, absent an eggregious and blatant violation by a cop, to feel justified in resisting.

That guy, Anderson, I think his name was, in Roanoke who was arrested because he didn't want to talk about his gun, could have lawfully resisted arrest to the point of shooting at least one of the cops in my opinion. But I'm pretty sure he'd have wound up dead if he'd done so. And that's because the cops would have murdered him in retaliation. No question in my mind. His family might have had a cause of action for wrongful death, but where's the witnesses? And who's going to prosecute the cops for murder, much less abduction?

The moral of the story is this: you may be able to knock him on his arse, and you may be able to have him arrested, from a strictly legal point of view. But as a practical matter, you're likely to wind up dead and the cop will not be arrested, even if you can find someone willing to take the complaint.
Like mentioned above, VA does allow citizens to physically resist an unlawful arrest (and does not prohibit deadly force). I see several issues with someone physically resisting an unlawful arrest/detention. With that statement, let me also say that I am not for anyone having their right's violated nor any misconduct by police.

The biggest issue I see with allowing someone to physically resist an unlawful arrest is "ignorance". Many people do not clearly understand the laws and Constitution, and may resist believing they are in the right and are not. I wish I had a dollar for every time someone demanded to know "the probable cause for you to stop me?".

Another issue is that an arrest is not a conviction. You are viewed innocent until proven guilty. If you had to place a percentage on probable cause, it would not equal 100%. There are situations where an officer has reached enough probable cause to arrest a citizen who may actually be innocent of that crime. That citizen would assume since they are innocent, that they are being unlawfully arrested and have the opportunity to use force against the officer. All while, the officer believes with his p.c. that it is lawful and returns using force.

Lastly, responding officers will only see the citizen resisting arrest (possibly with deadly force) and will react with a greater amount of force (even deadly). They obviously won't have time to sort out the facts in the case when they come on scene and will not be liable for their force since they are reacting to what they know at the time.

With all of that said, It's my opinion that everything is best settled in court. If an unlawful arrest is determined, then accountability should follow.
 

nova

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
3,149
Location
US
imported post

NovaCop10 wrote:
It's my opinion that everything is best settled in court.  If an unlawful arrest is determined, then accountability should follow. 


+1.
 
Top