Former Marine Brandon Raub NOT put in psych ward for posting on FB - Calm down everyone.

reply to post by JBA2848


Thanks for the thread reference and the mention of cookie cutter mental stuff. It is strange indeed that we have kids lining up in the schools to take their meds and the medical establishment is busy updating DSM with new categories.

After reading and catching up w/ this story...they have taken him away..he is in an institution...

Where in the heck did you get your info? MSM?

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by flyswatter

 

I'm not going to sit here and attempt to disagree with your opinion or anything like that, but this:

"You simply have no clue what you are talking about. If you are being forcefully detained against your will that is an arrest no matter what spin you put on it."

You are absolutely incorrect on this, sir. He is correct in saying that you can be detained for a period of time, including transport in handcuffs, without being arrested. Being detained involuntarily for a period (I wont place a time frame on it because I dont have 100% certainty what the lawful amount of time is) does not mean you've been arrested. If its not an arrest, it's not going to go on your record as such. I dont really know how much simpler it can be put for you.

You have no clue what your talking about. Detainment against your will is arrest. People are so damn ignorant. It doesn't matter what your corporate legislative policy statute calls it that is still being under arrest.
_____________________________________________________________________
Definition of arrest: Blacks Law De Lux 4th pg 140

"To deprive a person of his liberty by legal authority. Taking, under real OR ASSUMED authority, custody of another for the purpose of holding or DETAINING him to answer a criminal charge or civil demand. Physical seizure of person by arresting officer or submission to officers authority and control is necessary to constitute an arrest.

It is the taking , seizing or detaining the person of another, touching or putting hands upon him in the execution of process, or any act indicating an intention of arrest."
______________________________________________________________________

Tell me what part of any of the above does not apply to Mr Raub?

And by the way most if not all the states have statutes that you cannot hold anyone more the 72 hours without charging him with a crime or declaring him mentally incompetent.

Why do they not tell us under what authority or statute he is being held without charge etc? This is complete BS and those defending it will be in for a rude awakening as this becomes more openly prevalent. I say more openly because they have been doing this for decades just not so openly and blatant.

An arrest is an arrest no matter what BS the legislature tries to pass justifying it including the 72 hour BS. If you are in custody against your will you are under arrest period!!!

edit on 22-8-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

And the law also provides for detention without an arrest being made. You choose to pay attention to one part of the law, but not another? We're at an impasse here. But hey, you can interpret things however you like. Correct or incorrect, it's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

I've dealt with people that have had this happen to them on many occasions. I can honestly say that 60% were truly mentally unhinged, 35% of them were under the influence of strong drugs. The rest were suicidal or homicidal because of life circumstances and would see great improvement if certain people left their life. Not once have I met one of these people and said to myself, "they really screwed up this time." From personal experience I would say we wait this one out.

reply to post by MikeNice81


Wow this sums it all up! 100% of people are 100% guilty of something.
This is exactly the problem!

Please for the sake of humanity get a grip on your actions.

reply to post by HIWATT


That isn't directed at me but I'll answer.

The entire FB thing is not, as far as I know, substantiated and is just speculation. Even if FB posts, or emails, or any other e-communication were the cause, then it will be because Mr Raub posted or sent something illegal.

Until all the facts do surface this appears to be a cut and dry case of hold for psych eval.

~Heff

reply to post by flyswatter

And the law also provides for detention without an arrest being made. You choose to pay attention to one part of the law, but not another? We're at an impasse here.

No it does not there is no such law. Corporate statutes are not law they are corporate policy. I doubt youd understand that but then that is the problem in this country the majority of the people have no clue how their once free land has been subverted by the attorney/politician class. I just gave you the legal definition of arrest, detention is arrest period even in their won definition. Just because some statute says detention is not necessarily an arrest does not make it so, Anytime someone is detained against their will they have been arrested.

Are you a cop or something? You seem to think you know something about law but you are really clueless just like cops and most people are....
_________________________________________________
definition of detain Blacks Law 4th pg 535

To retain as the possession of personality. To ARREST, to check, to delay, to hinder, to hold, or keep in custody, to retard, to restrain from proceeding, to stay, to stop.
_____________________________________________________

They are synonymous!


Being detained but told you are not under arrest is like someone peeing down your back and telling you its just raining.... Goddamned attorneys have killed this country with their double speak BS!

This is a new GHASTLY way of dealing with "political prisoners": ( I never heard of this until recently; but in this case it seems to be a practice we should be aware of...)

The problem with "non custodial" "arrest"(??) At least if you are arrested and charged and convicted you are "in the system" ."Somebody" in a polo shirt(?) Puts you in handcuffs and who knows where you'll end up?

"diesel therapy"
[ext]

Diesel Therapy: U.S. Marshals Oversee Medieval Torture Caravan


educate-yourself.org...



Excerpt:

The harassment and torture that befell Congressman George Hansen came from prison officials, in the form of neglect for serious medical problems and health hazards in the prison work place. The torture also came from the Federal Marshals who cruelly transported him from one prison to another.

Political prisoners and those who are considered trouble makers arc given what prisoners call, "diesel therapy".

"Diesel therapy" consists of being put on diesel buses or airplanes and being transported from prison to prison for weeks and months at a time.

On the surface it sounds benign. What could be the problem with making a prisoner ride in a bus for hours at a time?

Torture American Style

Before the prisoner is put on the bus, he is put in handcuffs and shackles (leg irons). The handcuffs are tightened by a black box that stiffens the chains and puts the wrists in a 90 degree bind that painfully cuts circulation and damages the nerves. It takes several weeks for the circulation and nerves to return to normal. The handcuffs are connected with chains to a waist chain, which is in turn connected by another chain to the shackles which go around the ankles The prisoner can barely move once the shackling process is complete.

He is then placed in a small seat on a bus or airplane. (ED: George Hansen is a BIG man, standing well over 6'-3" and -- before his ordeal -- tipping the scales at well over 220 pounds.) Because of the shackles, the prisoner is forced to sit in one position for up to 20 hours at a time. And the guards will rarely go to the trouble of unshackling a prisoner. Prisoners who understand "diesel therapy" know that "fasting" is the only way to handle the ordeal without messing or wetting yourself.

But even those who are smart enough to abstain from food and drink, still have to suffer the stench of urine and feces which soon fills the bus or plane.

One other painful aspect of diesel therapy is the shoes that prisoners are forced to wear. They become too small. The cramped position and tight shackles cause the feet and ankles to swell. The shackles cut into the legs and cut off circulation. The blood pools in the feet and causes the feet to swell. The toes are forced up against the tops of the too small shoes, and unbelievable pressure is put on the toenails. The toenails soon become deformed, infected and painful.

Each day the metal shackles are put back onto raw and infected legs before the prisoner boards the bus. After weeks and months of diesel therapy, the ankles and shins have raw, infected and open wounds that will not heal.

Hour after hour, the prisoner sits in a cramped & painful position, with shackles cutting into already infected, raw flesh. Arthritis and bursitis compound the misery of the prisoners. The ingrown, infected toenails, which are jammed inside of purposely small shoes, cripple the prisoner to the point that he can barely walk or move when he is finally released from the shackles.

During the weeks and months of diesel therapy, the prisoner is out of contact with the rest of the world. In the case of Congressman Hansen, his wife did not know if he was dead or alive. His lawyer could not find him and therefore could not file court papers on time. Even the members of congress who were still trying to help him, could not locate him. During his diesel therapy" he disappeared into the black hole dug and run by the United States Marshals.

After "diesel therapy", Hansen was forced to operate on his feet himself. His toenails were so deformed that they pointed straight up. He could not wear shoes without excruciating pain. The only remedy that was open to him was to pull the toenails out by the roots. Our prisoners of war in SE Asia had their fingernails and toenails pulled out by their torturers. Congressman Hansen had to become his own torturer in an effort to stop the pain.

Several weeks ago, Congressman Hansen was testifying before his former colleagues in the House of Representatives. He told the story of his trip into Iran during the Iran hostage crisis in 1979. He was the only United States official to get into Iran to try to negotiate an end to the crisis.

While he was there, he was shown the horrible human suffering that was inflicted upon the Iranian people by the Shah of Iran and his secret police.

He told his former colleagues about the horrors of the Shah's torture chambers. Ankles that had been smashed by heavy clubs. Legs that had been smashed and permanently scarred. Hands and feet that had no nails because they were repeatedly pulled ou

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by flyswatter

 

And the law also provides for detention without an arrest being made. You choose to pay attention to one part of the law, but not another? We're at an impasse here.

No it does not there is no such law. Corporate statutes are not law they are corporate policy. I doubt youd understand that but then that is the problem in this country the majority of the people have no clue how their once free land has been subverted by the attorney/politician class. I just gave you the legal definition of arrest, detention is arrest period even in their won definition. Just because some statute says detention is not necessarily an arrest does not make it so, Anytime someone is detained against their will they have been arrested.

Are you a cop or something? You seem to think you know something about law but you are really clueless just like cops and most people are....
_________________________________________________
definition of detain Blacks Law 4th pg 535

To retain as the possession of personality. To ARREST, to check, to delay, to hinder, to hold, or keep in custody, to retard, to restrain from proceeding, to stay, to stop.
_____________________________________________________

They are synonymous!

edit on 22-8-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

Hmm, still incorrect, bubba.

The restriction for this DOES very from state to state, but most commonly referred to is Terry v. Ohio, which has been expanded upon to provide for brief holds (without or prior to arrest) based on less than probably cause. This originally dealt primarily with search and seizure.

What constitutes brief, that is left open to interpretation.

This also doesnt even begin to touch on psych holds. I cant really argue those much at all because I'm not nearly as familiar, so I'd be foolish to try. But they can (and do) hold individuals on psych holds without making an arrest.

You can interpret it in your own way all you want, and you can call it an arrest all you want, but that simply isnt the case. You can go more in depth and see how Terry v. Ohio has been referenced in subsequent cases, or the contents of the court opinions on the case, etc. All of the legal interpretations (which mean something, in contrast to whatever interpretation you or I have about the matter) are available to be seen. Google is your friend, sir. As are lawyers. Well, some anyway.

If you'd like, I'll post more cooberating information a bit later. At this time I am at work, getting ready to leave, and I have to pee, and my plans for the day do not include wet underwear.

reply to post by flyswatter



You simply don't get it like most and you won't till it happens to you, and maybe not even then. Let me clarify it for you. I am completely aware that they detain people and claim they are not under arrest. However according to the definitions in their own law dictionaries they are completely full of BS!

The sad part is simple minded folk allow themselves to be brainwashed into thinking there is a difference between being detained and under arrest. The frustrating part is a child could understand there is no difference except some semantics BS written into some statute.

What part of "your liberty has been denied you" do you not understand?... Anyway I give up the majority think like you which is why we have these problems in the first place and they continue to get worse...

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by flyswatter

 

You simply don't get it like most and you won't till it happens to you, and maybe not even then. Let me clarify it for you. I am completely aware that they detain people and claim they are not under arrest. However according to the definitions in their own law dictionaries they are completely full of BS!

The sad part is simple minded folk allow themselves to be brainwashed into thinking there is a difference between being detained and under arrest. The frustrating part is a child could understand there is no difference except some semantics BS written into some statute.

What part of "your liberty has been denied you" do you not understand?... Anyway I give up the majority think like you which is why we have these problems in the first place and they continue to get worse...

It just comes down to your definition and the cops' definition of "arrest" being different. You can call it an arrest all you want, but if they dont see it that way, your record never recognizes it as such.

But really, if you're putting yourself in a position to be arrested (cop definition, not yours), you're doing something wrong.

Originally posted by jtap66
What? You mean Kenyan Socialist Illuminati members from nibiru didn't teleport him to a scret base on Jupiter and sacrifice him to their owl god to appease the Zionists?

Man, my whole world has been turned upside down.

Hey I have a friend on the inside who "knows a guy", and that's what he says happened.
On topic.
No but really, if the PTB were gonna dissappear somebody, there would not be films of his arrest, he'd be found dead with an abused donkey in a barn somewhere and they would rule horseycide or something or the other...
This event sure has been pumped up though as I have mentioned in a few other threads

reply to post by flyswatter

But really, if you're putting yourself in a position to be arrested (cop definition, not yours), you're doing something wrong.

Innocent until proven guilty.
Ever heard of that?

Ahem,........
The FBI, has armed terrorists with explosives to do the first WTC bomb.....
This is documented fact!
What i am telling you in your ear...........Is that the goverment agencies are playing both sides!
They are providing the terror they are supposedly there to protect us from!
We are being mind controlled in a far deeper fashion than hypnotism or drug induced obedience.

The method of such manipulation is simple......applied trauma.....This is the basis for the reprogramming of
NOT only the MIND, but the entire PSYCHE/SOULS of the people.
Pioneered by such fiends as Dr Ewen Cameron, of "Psychic driving" fame (The method by which a patients entire sensory apparattus is overloaded over periods of time.....etc)These methods require nothing but the proper psychic shocks which selective trauma is used to apply.......
JFK,MLK,and onward to the present, the years show a litany of traumatic shocks delivered in precise ways to obtain certain socialogical results.
We did NOT get to this point by chance!
The fact that we may never know if indeed a multiplicity of such incarcerations may be taking place on Americam soil, kidnapping American citizens to stifle political or ideological descent........
Woe indeed to those who sign away their liberty for a sense of percieved security...............
The dragons teeth have long been sown, and the whirlwind awaits.......................

Originally posted by deadeyedick
reply to post by flyswatter

 

But really, if you're putting yourself in a position to be arrested (cop definition, not yours), you're doing something wrong.

Innocent until proven guilty.
Ever heard of that?

Cops aren't judges. They don't chose who's innocent or guilty. Courts do.

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by flyswatter

 

You simply don't get it like most and you won't till it happens to you, and maybe not even then. Let me clarify it for you. I am completely aware that they detain people and claim they are not under arrest. However according to the definitions in their own law dictionaries they are completely full of BS!

The sad part is simple minded folk allow themselves to be brainwashed into thinking there is a difference between being detained and under arrest. The frustrating part is a child could understand there is no difference except some semantics BS written into some statute.

What part of "your liberty has been denied you" do you not understand?... Anyway I give up the majority think like you which is why we have these problems in the first place and they continue to get worse...

Actually no.

There's lot's of laws which allow cops to take people to interview them, without arresting them.

United States v. Meza-Corrales (9th Cir. 1999) 183 F.3rd 1116; "(W)e allow intrusive and aggressive police conduct (handcuffing, in this case) without deeming it an arrest in those circumstances when it is a reasonable response to legitimate safety concerns on the part of the investigating officers."

Non-consensual transportation necessary to continue the detention out of the presence of a gathering, hostile crowd, held to be lawful under the circumstances. (People v. Courtney (1970) 11 Cal.App.3rd 1185, 1191-1192.)

More here: www.legalupdateonline.com...

Just two cases that show the police may handcuff you and transport you without arresting you. You can argue, and probably should, that in Raub's case it was excessive, but... and this is the important thing... there ARE laws and legal precedents which COULD make this all legal.

We can't judge as outsiders.

All we can do is try and understand as best we can.

reply to post by longlostbrother


" After reading the posts they decide, maybe he's just talking crap, maybe he's a threat, we don't know, but hey we're cops, let's go see. " yeah , like ya do

" They show up at his house, and he refuses to be rational with them, a crowd gathers. " - for the record , he`s not legally obliged to be rational with them , and what do they expect ? you dont just knock on doors accusing people of being crazy.

" The cops then decide that, the only way they'll get answers is to take him somewhere, a third location, and ask him questions. He refuses to go. Legally they can handcuff him and take him for questioning. " - for serious ? .... under what law ?

Originally posted by SpaceCadet69
reply to post by longlostbrother

 

" After reading the posts they decide, maybe he's just talking crap, maybe he's a threat, we don't know, but hey we're cops, let's go see. "

yeah , like ya do

" They show up at his house, and he refuses to be rational with them, a crowd gathers. " - for the record , he`s not legally obliged to be rational with them , and what do they expect ? you dont just knock on doors accusing people of being crazy.

" The cops then decide that, the only way they'll get answers is to take him somewhere, a third location, and ask him questions. He refuses to go. Legally they can handcuff him and take him for questioning. " - for serious ? .... under what law ?

In reverse order:

- I've listed, in this thread, links to legal precedents that could make their activities legal. Please read the thread if you're confused.

- He doesn't have to be rational, but interviews can quickly turn into arrests. There's no evidence, at all, that they came there to arrest him. In fact, they didn't arrest him, so.

- That's what cops do. Someone makes a complaint or says they're being threatened, cops will, in most cases, follow up on it. It's not only not weird, but indeed it's SOP.

So anyone that questions their governments motives is now a lunatic or a terrorist and can be whisked away and held for questioning to determine if they are crazy or are a threat. In that case I call upon the police to investigate everyone in the White House and House of Representatives. I am certain there is some crooks and loonies in there.

Originally posted by sean
So anyone that questions their governments motives is now a lunatic or a terrorist and can be whisked away and held for questioning to determine if they are crazy or are a threat. In that case I call upon the police to investigate everyone in the White House and House of Representatives. I am certain there is some crooks and loonies in there.

edit on 23-8-2012 by sean because: (no reason given)

Call the cops then. But you'll need to provide evidence to local police, something they will think is actionable.

Here's their phone number: (202) 727-9099

The State of Virginia is holding him.
Here are there laws on how and why they are holding him.

leg1.state.va.us...

§ 37.2-809. Involuntary temporary detention; issuance and execution of order.
leg1.state.va.us...

§ 37.2-810. Transportation of person in the temporary detention process
leg1.state.va.us...

Nobody is doing this guy a favor as long as the preach NDAA is why he is where he is. NDAA is not what put him there. Learn what laws put there and go after the correct target. As long as NDAA is brought up the crazier he will sound along with the people who also preach NDAA. The laws on the books that put him away are the ones enacted in 2008 by the state of Virginia that changed the Involuntary commitment rules to be easier to lock people up after the Virginia Tech shootings. Somebody is using this poor kid as a pawn with no regard to how it is going to effect him. He is nothing but a sheeple in there cause a pawn who can be lost as long as they get closer to there own goals. And the bad thing is his mother seems no better than him when it comes to being used misdirected and confused by the lies and propaganda. The mother would be better off if she got outside counsel from her circle of friends. They don't seem to know or care for the facts in the case. Sort of like getting Orly Taitz to be your immigraion attoreny and not understanding why things keep going wrong for you.