Man Attacks Cop Attempting Arrest of Other Suspect

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
In fact, you are doing just that with your posts, you are determining the men in the videos are guilty. Unless you are a court, you do not have that right or authority.

Actually im not.. Im telling you that the actions of the 2 individuals in question does in fact meet the elements under Maryland law for resisting arrest. Whether or not the PA files charges is something else entirely. Any arrest is lawful and valid until a court says otherwise, including this case.


I addressed this issue as well. The US Supreme Court has ruled a person cannot resist an unlawful arrest, and the court case for that is also in the posts above.

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
While the original case was made in Indiana Supreme Court, it was upheld by the US Supreme Court. See:Your Right of Defense Against Unlawful Arrest where is states:

Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

Your answer is in the very part you quoted where it states the difference between a murder charge or a manslaughter charge.The court is not justifying the use of deadly force against an officer where the arrest is in question. They are saying that it can be a mitigating circumstance, which means case by case.

Contrary to what you may think, its not tacit approval to kill an officer for making an arrest. AS a private citizen, again, you dont get the ability to determine what a lawful or unlawful arrest is.

What you also are ignoring, or just dont know about, is a term called reasonable amount of force. An unlawful arrest by its definition is not a violent act, so the use of deadly force to stop an unlawful arrest violates the Supreme Court rulings for defense of self or others. The standard applied to law enforcement in most cases is the exact same standard for civilians (some states will differ) which is the amount of force used must be in proportion to the level of resistance and no more.

IE you cannot kill an officer because you think the arrest is unlawful.

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
How can you tell all this went down from the video?

Because the video shows exactly what I just listed, and goes along with the news article I posted a few pages back that gave the account of what occurred. I am guessing you might have missed that post?

Here it is again -
Baltimore Officer attacked while making arrest

Mike Hellgren explains how it all started.

A man in the olive-colored jacket headed toward police as they made an arrest. He lunged at an officer, knocking him to the ground in front of a crowd of people on Monument and Rose streets in East Baltimore. More officers rushed in and got the man under control.

“I can’t describe this as anything else than an act of cowardice,” said police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi. “I don’t know if there’s any clearer example of what the men and women of this agency go through to keep this city safe.”

Gugliemi says it happened New Year’s Eve, around 2:30 p.m. He says it started when Manuel Imel banged his car door into a police cruiser. The officer inside got out to confront him, noticing Imel was drunk. Then another man rushed to the scene. That’s the man police are trying to arrest on the video. He got in the officer’s face, angry he was questioning Imel. While police had their hands full trying to arrest him, Imel left and then came back. Then the confrontation unfolded.

“We live in a day and age now where anyone with a cell phone has a camera and photographic capabilities. We respect that,” Guglielmi said.

Imel, who already has a lengthy criminal record, faces several new charges including assaulting law enforcement, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.

The man who police originally were trying to arrest fled the scene. They’re not identifying him but say there is a warrant out for his arrest.



Imel is being held on $100,000 bond.

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
Edit:
Now show me where in the law is states that we do not have the right to defend against unlawful arrest, when it states clearly in the law you posted it only states that you cannot resist a lawful arrest.

edit on 20-1-2012 by PplVSNWO because: (no reason given)

Under common law, Maryland citizens were able to resist an unlawful arrest by arguing its a violation of the 4th amendment. Since the turn of the century Maryland courts have shifted to the position a person has no right to resist an unlawful arrest, and has held to that standard ever since. Part of the reason for that is the Us Supreme Court ruling which I posted that answered the common law question for every single state, commonwealth and territory in the US.

An individual does NOT have a right to resist an unlawful arrest, let alone using deadly force to do so. The ruling out of Indiana is in conflict with the Supreme Court ruling, and as such will eventually end up back in court. As an example, in the State of Missouri its lawful for a private individual to shoot a fleeing felon. The statute does not make any differentiation on whether the person is armed or not.

That state law is in conflict with the Supreme Court ruling of Tennesse Vs. Gardner, which states a person cannot be shot while fleeing unless they pose an imminent threat the the public as a whole. Just because state law says its ok, doesnt mean you arent going to be in trouble for performing the action.

I think you are getting tripped up on what im talking about with reference to the video and the very end actions. Both parties met the elements for resisting arrest before the recording even started. The DWI driver who was detained by police, who then fled when the black guy interfered. The black guy for interfering in the original detention of the DWI driver. Then, again, when the dwi driver returned and assaulted the officer while they were arresting the black guy.

Those actions are text book examples of resisting arrest. As I stated before, a person does not have to end up in a knock down drag out fight with police to qualify for resisting a lawful detention / arrest.

I think you are fixating on the use of force to effect the arrest?

reply to post by Xcathdra


Your changing your story...probably like a cop. You said the man on the GROUND was reisitng . And again...the VIDEO does NOT show that.

You don't need to cut and paste..or read a news article...just watch tthe video. It shows a amn on the ground with a couple of cops roughing him up.

reply to post by type0civ


The video does show that, and its obvious in the first few minutes of the video where we see the black guy resisting against being taken into custody just before the dwi guy punches the officer.

Just because you dont understand what a law is, what elements of a crime are, and how they interact with a persons actions is not my problem. Further your personal attacks are funny in that it again proves my point that you have absolute no desire to find the truth so long as you can blame the police for whatever perceived injustice you think occurred.

I know what im talking about, where as you are doing nothing but personal attacks because you aren't getting your way and are unable to defend your position because the law doesn't support you. Apparently you are no better than the black guy or the dwi guy in the video. Pissed at law enforcement for something that most likely occurred in your youth and instead of learning, you take the easy, lazy way out.

typical... I see why you are trying to side with the black guy and dwi guy who broke the law multiple times.

The guys got some cahones
but not much upstairs.

He had his beer muscles on
and this sort of thing happens
all the time just we usually
do not see it..

The dude that nailed the cop
is really lucky though
that he didn't get a 9mm
lead bullet in his skull.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Okay buddy, if you think you have the right to unlawfully arrest people, keep it up. The US Supreme Court ruling that I posted and you just reposted says that taking an officer's life that is attempting an unlawful arrest is not murder, but manslaughter or no crime at all.
How is that any different than any other non law enforcement assaulting you? Where did it state you can't resist unlawful arrest? Unlawful arrest is assault and battery, where does the law state you can't defend yourself against assault and battery?
You failed to take not of this in the ruling:

If the officer had no right to arrest, the other party might resist the illegal attempt to arrest him, using no more force than was absolutely necessary to repel the assault constituting the attempt to arrest. 1 East, supra.

supreme.justia.com...

Now, granted, the incident in question in this thread may have been a lawful arrest but you kept saying that you could tell what was going on in the video, that is the only reason I was calling you out on the fact that you can't tell from the video if the man is resisting a lawful arrest.

I have seen more videos of the police beating up civilians than civilians beating up police. I have seen the courts rule time and time again about officer safety when they are the ones armed with guns, tazers and clubs. I have seen a ton of videos where the crowd is yelling at the officers when they are assaulting people,

This is one of the first I have seen of of a citizen fighting back, I have to wonder if this is a trend that will continue?

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
Okay buddy, if you think you have.....

Yup, meaning a civilian does NOT have a right to use deadly force against an officer making an arrest. As I stated time and again that you dont seem to comprehend is declaring an arrest invalid / false resides with the court, not the officer nor the person being arrested.

Secondly a false arrest is a misdemeanor, not a felony, meaning their is no affirmative defense for the use of deadly force.

3rd the Supreme Court has ruled that a use of force cannot be reviewed as a hindsight 20/20 manner. The standard established is what did the officer perceive at the exact moment force was used.

Lastly, determination is based on state laws, not the federal law. While the supreme court ruling applies to all states, it allows the states to shape their own laws so long as it complies with the Supreme Court ruling. Several states require a civilian to disengage from an encounter if they are able to do so safely. If they are able to and opt instead to continue the fight, then they are in violation of the law.

This is not a hard concept to understand.

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
How is that any different than any other non law enforcement assaulting you? Where did it state you can't resist unlawful arrest? Unlawful arrest is assault and battery, where does the law state you can't defend yourself against assault and battery?

Again if you took the time to read my post where I cited the Statute on resisting an arrest in Maryland, you will have your answer. The standard for Maryland is a person cannot resist a lawful arrest. Again the determination of an unlawful arrest resides with the courts, not law enforcement or civilians. Any arrest is lawful until a court says otherwise.

Law Enforcement is not "assaulting" a person when they are making an arrest.

As far as wanting the law, here you go. Maryland is a "duty to retreat" state.

Self-defense (MPJI-Cr 5:07)

Self-defense is a defense, and the defendant must be found not guilty if all of the following three factors are present:
1) The defendant actually believed that was in immediate and imminent danger of bodily harm.
2) The defendant's belief was reasonable.
3) The defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend in light of the threatened or actual harm.