Detroit investigators raid home of fire chaser who held up arsonist: Stop playing cop

Unless different there (Detroit), Arson is usually ran by the FD not the PD. Our guys are one of us, then if so chose, go through peace officer school and then further arson training. But still under the FD!
So, if the turd Detroit PD raided this guy it was their investigation based on citizens arrest. Freelance photographers for FD LOVE what they do and I can see a few getting overzealous. They make bank off of a camera and scanner going to our calls.

a reply to: TexasTruth

Thing is TexasTruth, there is a difference between investigating an arson, and making an arrest. I would very much doubt that the investigating FD member, is also the arresting officer in the event of a forcible arrest. Those are, in the case of the official law enforcement system, handled by police or other agencies, not by fire officials, who have no special permits to carry weapons for their defence and for the pacification of dangerous suspects, nor any greater right to use them than any other regular citizen.

For an arrest therefore, you would normally expect a police officer or several, to be present, is that not so?

And if the police are not responding at all, when a citizen has the perpetrator in their headlights, would you not want someone to stop that individual escaping and starting another fire, potentially harming more peoples lives, and certainly the property owners livelihood?

Like I said, unsure about Detroit but our guys have guns, make arrests, and some have dogs. I could go in to work tomorrow and put in for arson. You go through the police academy, arson school, and in 6 months to a year you are packing heat and making arrest. They actually have a little more power than a street cop. a reply to: TrueBrit

i dont like the idea of this citizen arrest bull#

for one the person playing cop might think he saw some # he didnt see. this is a problem
the person getting arrested by the citizen might not be compliant and that ups the risk for the citizen to get injured. this is a problem

i have never liked that idea. dont need a bunch of dudes out there playing cowboy trying to save the day.

i know i would not take kindly to getting detained by your average joe if i did do something illegal. if i did not do something illegal and the citizen tried to detain me for something he thought he saw me do i would be even more angry.

i think the juice is not worth the squeeze on this one.

all it is asking for is confrontation.

unless you are law enforcement you have no business detaining someone. too much # can happen

like the story from a couple months ago where the guy tried to detain a dude for pissing against the outside wall of a restaurant. dude wound up dying and the guy and his wife(who is a cop) both wound up arrested. the guy he tried to detain died...
not good

Another question: What if you have a conceal carry permit, can it be used?

a reply to: TinySickTears

like the story from a couple months ago where the guy tried to detain a dude for pissing against the outside wall of a restaurant. dude wound up dying and the guy and his wife(who is a cop) both wound up arrested. the guy he tried to detain died... not good

I forgot about that. I don't know why I thought that happened last year. But you're right, it happened in May. And the couple was arrested in June.
Deputy, husband indicted in man’s beating death turn selves in.

Based on the discussion we had in this thread, the consensus is that citizen's arrest is not the best way to handle a situation like this.

However, valid questions do remain about how well the Detroit Police and Fire Departments handled the investigation.

Thanks,
-dex

originally posted by: DexterRiley
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Basically if this guy hadn't held this woman up with a firearm he would have been in the clear. I'm not sure why people are trying to blame this situation on corruption though.

He claims that he didn't use a firearm. He said that he was in possession of a paintball gun, but he did not use it in the "arrest."

Presumably the police have some reason to believe that he used a weapon. I wonder why they believe that to be the case.

-dex

They believe that to be the case because it helps their own "kangaroo case".

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

They believe that to be the case because it helps their own "kangaroo case".

That was another part of the general consensus. There is definitely a strong retribution element involved in this Detroit PD investigation into the fire chaser.

The fact that the fire chaser, an untrained civilian, solved an arson investigation that had been on-going for several months makes the Fire and Police Departments look utterly stupid.

-dex

originally posted by: DexterRiley

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: strongfp

Because citizens have rights and an untrained civilian could easily violate those rights without knowing it which could cause the case to be thrown out of court.

That presents an interesting conundrum. If he doesn't act, the arsonist might get away. Which would allow her to possibly start another fire that might take someone's life next time.

If he does act, then not only might he get in trouble or injured, but he could also violate the alleged perpetrators civil rights; as well as contaminate the evidence, leading to case dismissal or acquittal.

What would you do?

-dex

Reminds me of the "innocent bystander"

a reply to: TexasTruth

I am pretty sure that Texas may be a different kettle of fish to pretty much everywhere else in that regard.

Here is a legit question...

Firefighters put out fires and investigate causes, thats fine... but why in the HELL would they have to actually be part of law enforcement? What kind of nonsense is that?