Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What do you do besides put up NO TRESPASSING signs all over your property?
The biker claimed he did not see such a sign. Is that claim the truth or a lie? I don't know. Either way, his simply being on the property doesn't give the property owner legal authority "escort" him at gunpoint to another location under threat of shooting up his property.
Quote:
Ignorance is not a defense.
For trespass, outside of saying you weren't actually on the property, it's the best defense. To commit criminal trespass, you have to have been made aware that you are forbidden from entering. If not made aware, you can be there.
Quote:
Why would you assume the cops are telling the truth and the property owner that called them is lieing? He is the one that requested their assistance. And, why would they demand that his wife erase the video tape -if they were doing nothing wrong?
I don't know what you're talking about. I'm not believing anyone over anyone. I'm simply stating that this man was arrested for assault - not for having a gun.
And I see no evidence that the cops demanded the wife erase the video tape. What I heard was a cop saying he wanted her to turn off the video so that he could collect the recording as evidence. Which I don't approve of. I would counsel her to call the ACLU for assistance on that matter.
Good. He should be able to sue both of these officers, personally. Leave the tax payers out of it.
These folks can sue, and another illegal thing the cops did was have the guys wife delete the file. Cops don't like it but there is no law against filming them in the act of breaking the law. The guy with the gun was stupid to have the gun not loaded.
He should have just taken the bad boys bike and then made him walk with out it. No gun at all or not visible anyway. Then call the cops in a day or so..... But now they can sue for false arrest and make money.
I know this will be hard for some of you but please keep in mind that the only person to make the claim that anyone pointed a gun at him just happens to be the guy who was caught trespassing on someone's land on a dirt bike after having passed no trespassing signs on the trail. The property owner denies that he pointed his gun at the trespasser, this is just an allegation.
He still had the gun in his hands when the police showed up. This indicates that he was using the gun to intimidate and threaten the trespasser into compliance. Trespassing is not a felony.
Quote:
764.16 Arrest by private person; situations.
Sec. 16.
A private person may make an arrest—in the following situations:
(a) For a felony committed in the private person's presence.
(b) If the person to be arrested has committed a felony although not in the private person's presence.
(c) If the private person is summoned by a peace officer to assist the officer in making an arrest.
(d) If the private person is a merchant, an agent of a merchant, an employee of a merchant, or an independent contractor providing security for a merchant of a store and has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has violated section 356c or 356d of the Michigan penal code, Act No. 328 of the Public Acts of 1931, being sections 750.356c and 750.356d of the Michigan Compiled Laws, in that store, regardless of whether the violation was committed in the presence of the private person.
How do you know the timeline, were you there? Do you know how long it took for Crawford County deputies to respond?
I didn't think so.
and no, you don't point a gun at someone and hold them, that again is false imprisonment.
Well yeah, if Donald had any gonads, he would have flagged the person down, told him you know you're riding on my property, warned him not to do it again, and went about his business, yup, Don messed up, but I'm confident he'll just get a slap on the wrist, a $200.00 fine, and the judge will tell him, don't let it happen again.
I don't get what's so hard for some people to argue about with what we have available. I'm arguing based on the facts, everyone else here, except us, seem to be making allegations of this and that without any evidence. We're the only levelheaded ones on here, in addition to hammertime. So I guess being levelheaded makes one a "Dem" or a "librul"
He still had the gun in his hands when the police showed up. This indicates that he was using the gun to intimidate and threaten the trespasser into compliance. Trespassing is not a felony.
He was holding the shotgun open in one hand and the shells in the other hand when the police showed up. How was he intimidating someone with a split shotgun with no shells in it?
He was holding the shotgun open in one hand and the shells in the other hand when the police showed up. How was he intimidating someone with a split shotgun with no shells in it?
There is such a thing as assaulting someone with an unloaded weapon. Doesn't matter if it's loaded or not. Was it out of his hands? No. Therefore, assault
He was holding the shotgun open in one hand and the shells in the other hand when the police showed up. How was he intimidating someone with a split shotgun with no shells in it?
Most likely he took them out as the police approached. You really think he had no shells in the gun when he was out hunting and confronted the trespasser?
There is such a thing as assaulting someone with an unloaded weapon. Doesn't matter if it's loaded or not. Was it holstered? No. Was it out of his hands? No.
I understand that, but holding a shotgun doesn't automatically mean you're assaulting someone either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.