Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Let's Have a Discussion About Self-Defense

So if y’all do a citizen’s arrest at gunpoint on somebody that just slugged his woman companion and slugged her again when she got up, what do you when said villain laughs at you and walks away?? He just committed assault. Shootem? Wave bye-bye?? File charges for escaping custody? Or perhaps he walks toward you. Are you ready to risk everything you own or ever will as well as a prison term for someone you don’t know? Enquiring minds…….

“Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.”

John Stuart Mill

Let's connect some dots. The old GA citizens arrest law only allowed them to detain him if he had committed a felony. The GA law I posted shows that burglary only rises to the felony level IF

...without authority and with the intent to commit a felony or theft therein, he or she enters or remains within an occupied, unoccupied, or vacant dwelling house of another...

Let's focus on the "intent to commit a felony or theft" therein." He did not commit a theft. So for them to legally hold him, they would have had to, through some factual means, establish his intent. They obviously could not have possibly known his intent.

Good question.

I believe that just about any LEO can warn the public about involvement in domestic disputes.

Are you going to contribute meaningfully to the substance of this thread? If not, go fist yourself immediately.

you seem to be focused on the actual theft part and leaving out intent.

I've already explained intent - he has a criminal background of theft, he has been accused of theft in the area prior that day.

The crime of burglary occurs as soon as the defendant unlawfully enters or remains in the structure with the intent to commit a theft or some other crime, even if the intended crime or theft never occurs. Say a person sneaks into a home, but before he can take anything, the homeowner returns and the person flees. Despite not stealing anything, the person still committed the crime of burglary. If the theft or other crime is completed, additional charges can be filed. Intent to commit a crime can also be formed after unlawfully entering the premises. (Dillard v. State, 753 S.E.2d 772 (Ga. App. 2013).)


,
the challenge here is criminal trespass versus burglary. If he didn't intend to steal, then he committed a misdemeanor. But that puts the onus on the citizen to determine intent, which can be based on circumstantial evidence and their belief a felony occurred.

The reason I said he was guilty of at least second degree burglary is because of the questioning of whether a home under construction is actually a dwelling. Under Georgia law

A person commits second-degree burglary by entering or remaining in any building, structure, railroad car, watercraft, or aircraft (that is not a dwelling) with intent to commit a felony or theft.

I don't think the issue in this case is whether he committed a felony worthy of a citizens arrest. According to people in the neighborhood, he committed multiples of them in the past. The questions are, (1) did the McMichaels have first hand knowledge of - which they have video evidence of him entering a home, and 2, were they allowed to detain him for a felony committed days earlier, which according to the intent of the law when it was created, they did.

Curious. How many times did you use deadly force or been involved in a deadly force incident or even a ag assault in your life/career?

Ever appear in court and testify as a witness or as a defendant in a use of force matter? How about an inter Amal agency use of force incident?

Just curious because you keep citing different use of force laws.

You just read the last comment, don't you? Is it an ADHD thing? They have drugs for that. You should wear a flesh colored helmet in your picture.

Leaving out intent? I literally addressed it in each of those four sentences.

The onus was on the McMichaels to establish intent if they were going to effect a citizens arrest. They didn't. They couldn't have. That's why the should not have tried to detain Arbery and that's why they were found guilty of false imprisonment.

no you didn't, you literally said "He did not commit a theft"

and I explained a theft does not have to occur to commit a burglary. Theft and Burglary are not the same thing. So you are right by definition but focused on the wrong thing, He committed burglary

This thread rules.

LOL

You don't want to enter any situation with "citizen arrest" on your mind.

Write that down.

This thread is not about me. It's about thoroughly understanding the whole of a decision to use deadly force in self-defense. If you take exception to anything I have said, use your considerable experience to substantively refute it. If not, go fist yourself with your intellectual equal Jim.

based on what other lawyers have said, they absolutely could based on the evidence and past activities. He was a known thief. They could reasonably suspect he had committed a burglary. I'll leave it at that.

I wonder how many here have ever used a firearm in self-defense?

Are you being purposefully obtuse? I dissected both elements. There are two ways for his actions to have risen to the felony level. One was to have committed a theft. He did not commit a theft. The other was intent. I touched in intent in four of the four quoted sentences. You said I was "leaving out intent."

What relevance would that have?

Deadly force is not an option when you are arresting someone for theft.

The subject is self-defense. Specifically deadly force.