
Originally Posted by
Markass
Just as my post indicated...There was nothing for him to be arrested for, therefore resisting a false arrest is not illegal..He had every right to attempt to flee. It was a false arrest, and it was his duty, as the supreme court has ruled...
There is no such crime as "resisting arrest." This is a fictitious crime dreamed up by law enforcement to accuse a citizen of a crime when they refuse to surrender to the illegal demands of the police.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on numerous occasions that resisting a false arrest is not merely a citizen's right, but his duty! In fact, the Supreme Court has gone so far as to rule that if a law enforcement officer is killed as a result of actions stemming from a citizen's attempts to defend themselves against a false arrest, it is the fault of the officer, not the citizen.
Here's a short collection of relevant court rulings on false arrest and resisting arrest:
"When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified." Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.
"These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence." Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.
"An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery." (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
In other words, Andrew Meyer would have been justified in using whatever reasonable means necessary to defend his life against his assailants. The gang of six individuals who assaulted Meyer, regardless of what clothing and badges they were wearing, were threatening his safety and his life. They assaulted him with a dangerous and potentially deadly weapon, and they kidnapped him by forcefully removing him from the room against his will.
Was Meyer being annoying to others by taking up air time at the microphone? Perhaps so. But being annoying is not a crime. If it were, John Kerry, President Bush and practically elected official in the country should be arrested. They're all far more annoying than Meyer.
Additional information from the courts:
"Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense." (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).
Why did the bystanders not assist Meyer?
The most astonishing thing about this video is not merely the fact that six police officers brutally assaulted and arrested Meyer for his "Free Speech crimes," but that this room full of onlookers did nothing while Meyer screamed for help. (YES!!!WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?)
In 1964, a New York resident named Kitty Genovese was stabbed to death, screaming for help, while hundreds of her neighbors watched and did nothing. No one called the police. The case of Kitty Genovese became a lightning rod for psychological research that attempted to understand the madness of crowds and why a group of people would do nothing to help an innocent bystander.
Tell me that he deserved to have his rights violated? Fuck that, this is america, and that's what we're a free country for?