Theyre not letting these guys go after the rittenhouse case. Theres no fucking way. These guys are gonna be the sacrificial lambs to the nigger gods.
Branca isn't completely wrong, but he doesn't seem to understand what the judge is doing.
The statue is pretty clear and is very much in line with the common understanding of how citizens arrest works in Texas.
If a misdemeanor, you must witness the crime. If a felony, you must have reasonable probable cause. You don't have to actually witness a felony to conduct a citizens arrest, but if you don't have reasonable (as determined by a jury If you're wrong) probable cause, you can be charged with charges related to assault and kidnapping.
What the judge is doing is allowing the jury to come to its own conclusion about what the law clearly says. This keeps the judge from looking like he's taking a side. If this is a reasonable jury, versus a packed jury, they will conclude reasonably.
But wasn't aubury committing a simple misdemeanor?
I understand what you are saying. Here is my contention. It is the court's duty to enforce the law. As such, it is not the jury's duty to reinterpret the law in every proceeding. If the law is not clear, a judgment cannot be rendered. And the issue should be sent to the legislators for clarification.
The law is fairly clear though.
Probable cause that a felony has been committed - arrest is authorized.
Witness a misdemeanor - arrest is authorized.
You could argue that it isn't clear what constitutes probable cause, but that's been argued for as long as we've had a judicial system. Right along with when it's okay to use deadly force. A reasonable person must believe that he/she is in fear of imminent serious bodily harm or death. Both are clear standards with room for jury interpretation.
Both are good points.
The ever evolving reasonable person and probable cause can be sources of contention and manipulation by lawyers.
(post is archived)