Federal? or state? Not sure if legalese matters here.
No. It doesnât.
A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.
It requires their presence during the crime, or immediate knowledge.
Not road blocking the guy at a later date while heâs jogging.
2 Likes
i agree. its all going to revolve around the nature of the evidence fueling their suspicion. if they canât produce any, then they were attempting to unlawfully detain him which itself is a felony. Killing another person in the commission of a felony is an aggravating element which could raise this to capital murder. their actual intent could be a mitigating factor.
1 Like
no it does not.
it requires knowledge a crime was committed and in the event it was a felony and the suspect is escaping, reasonable and probable grounds for suspicion.
Jogging down the road days/weeks after the crime is not âattempting to escapeâ so its irrelevant.
not even close.
within the statute:
they knew a crime was committed. they knew it was a felony. they saw the person who they, presumably, reasonably suspected committed the crime and attempted to detain him, he tried to escape.
the question will revolve around the nature of the evidence fueling their suspicion. If a reasonable person would share it, they acted within the statute. That is simply how the statute is written. in my opinion its a bit overly broad. and, as of this moment i do not believe their self serving statements regarding suspicion.
And for WR.
Iâm thinking we donât have the full video. In addition to the previous statements about the two following him, there is this:
https://www.gpbnews.org/post/breaking-down-georgias-citizens-arrest-law-after-ahmaud-arbery-fatal-shooting
An unidentified witness filmed Arbery being pursued by the McMichaels in a white pickup truck. In the video, the elder McMichael is seen in the bed of the truck holding a shotgun, while Arbery wrestles with 34-year-old Travis McMichael.
occu
290
They suspected him of committing a crime, he was not a felon fleeing.
Can citizens arrest people based on suspicions?
Georgia itself has ruled multiple times recently that use of force to enact a citizens arrest is not authorized.
Also, no they didnât personally witness, nor have first hand information of a crime. They had video they said was suspicious. Suspicious is not a felony, nor a crime.
read the statute.
yes.
he does not have to be a felon fleeing. the crime he is suspected of committing has to be a felony, and he has to be attempting to escape. there are mutually exclusive. the statute does not require he actually be fleeing the crime.
1 Like
The GA code reads as such, âA private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.â
From the police report they said, "Upon my arrival I observed Officer Minshew ( 184) setting up a perimeter .
I began speaking with Gregory McMichael who was a witness to the incident .
McMichael stated there have been several Break - ins in the neighborhood and
further the suspect was caught on surveillance video. Michael stated he was in his
his front yard and saw the suspect from the break - ins " hauling " down Satilla
Drive toward Burford Drive. McMichael stated he then ran inside his house and
called to Travis ( ) and said " Travis the guy is running down the
street lets go " â
So, this wasnât in his immediate knowledge nor was he currently escaping or attempting to escape. This was later? Doesnât this not apply? It seems the statute was made more for cases of citizen arrest say for a fight in a store or something who tries to escape. This seems in their words not fitting.
Incorrect. It says if the offender is trying to escape.
They didnât even know he was the offender.
The code says attempting to escape or escaping. Both are present tense, "A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.â
occu
296
Are you refering to the statue steel wolf posted?
the statute does not require they witness it, just have immediate knowledge of it. they claim they had video of Arbrey that was suspicious.
- they had knowledge of the crime
- the crime was a felony
-
they say they have video of Arbrey that is suspicious.
depends on what â3â is.
use of force does not require any authorization and the statute does not preclude it.
1 Like
same one i posted yesterday i think
they attempted to detain him and he did attempt to escape.
look. iâm not defending these guys, simply pointing out that under this statute, if what they say is true, and if a reasonable person would agree with their suspicion, they were acting within the statute. maybe, the statute needs to be looked at.
1 Like
i would agree with what the legislature may have been trying to write into the statute, but thatâs not what they wrote. if everything is as McMichael says, what they did is covered by this statute.
knowledge of the crime
a felony
reasonable suspicion
a suspect who was getting away
btw, i donât believe they have any such video.
That isnât how it works. in order for them to attempt to arrest, he as to try to escape. Doesnât go flip.
