Thread: Castle Doctrine Triumph: A Victory for the Right to Resist in Michigan

Castle Doctrine Triumph: A Victory for the Right to Resist in Michigan

Posted on 23 April 2012 by William Grigg

By a 5-2 majority, the Michigan State Supreme Court upheld the “Castle Doctrine” by validating a citizen’s right to resist unlawful arrest. Man who resisted police wins Supreme Court case | News - Home In People v. Moreno, a 5-2 majority ruled that Angel Moreno, Jr. acted legally when he refused to allow the police access to his home without a warrant.

On December 30, 2008, Officers Matthew Hamberg and Troy DeWeis knocked on Moreno’s door while searching for an individual suspected of a probation violation. Moreno made the mistake of speaking with Hamberg through an open door, thereby giving the policeman an excuse to say that he detected the odor of marijuana (even though DeWeis – who apparently didn’t have Hamberg’s uniquely acute sense of smell — did not).

When Moreno refused to consent to a search, Hamberg said that he would get a warrant – and then lied by saying that it was necessary for him to enter the house in order to “secure” it.

Moreno ordered Hamberg to get off his porch, and began to close the door. Rather than obeying that lawful order from a citizen, Hamberg bulled his way into the house. A brief struggle ensued that ended when Hamberg told his companion to attack the victim with his Taser. Although a trivial amount of marijuana was found, no drug-related charges were filed. Convicted of resisting and obstructing and assault on a police officer, Moreno appealed the case to the state supreme court.

In its brief before the state supreme court, the State admitted that Hamberg’s search was “unlawful.” In other words, he acted as an armed, violent intruder, rather than a peace officer. This means that under Michigan’s version of the “Castle Doctrine,” as laid out in its Self-Defense Act (SDA), Moreno had a legally recognized right to employ deadly force, if necessary, to defend himself and his home.

As the Michigan State Supreme Court acknowledged in People v. Riddle
http://courts.michigan.gov/supremeco...96-Opinion.pdf
(2002), “regardless of the circumstances one who is attacked in his dwelling is never required to retreat where it is otherwise necessary to exercise deadly force in self-defense. When a person is in his `castle,’ there is no safer place to retreat….”

The primary focus of the “Castle Doctrine” is the threat posed by government agents, rather than private trespassers. In a 1999 ruling (People v. Wess),PEOPLE v. WESS, Docket No. the state Court of Appeals expressly recognized the individual right “to use such reasonable force as is necessary to prevent an illegal attachment and to resist an illegal arrest.”

In the dicta of that ruling the court pleaded with the legislature to change the Self-Defense Act:

“We share the concerns of other jurisdictions that the right to resist an illegal arrest is an outmoded and dangerous doctrine, and we urge our Supreme Court to reconsider this doctrine at the first available opportunity…. [W]e see no benefit to continuing the right to resist an otherwise peaceful arrest made by a law enforcement officer, merely because the arrestee believes the arrest is illegal. Given modern procedural safeguards for criminal defendants, the `right’ only preserves the possibility that harm will come to the arresting officer or the defendant.”

Prompted by the Court of Appeals, the Michigan Legislature modified the relevant section of the state code (MCL 705.81d) by removing the word “lawful”; this supposedly meant that citizens would have to submit to an arrest irrespective of its legitimacy. However, the legislature did not expressly abrogate the common law right to resist unlawful arrest.

In a 2004 ruling (People v. Ventura) PEOPLE v. VENTURA, Docket No. dealing with the right to resist an unlawful arrest, the same Michigan Court of Appeals, which had badgered the state legislature to modify the SDA, cited that modification as a positive statement of legislative intent. In a richly disingenuous passage, the court wrote that “it is not within our province to disturb our Legislature’s obvious affirmative choice to modify the traditional common-law rule that a person may resist an unlawful arrest.”

In People v. Moreno, the Michigan Supreme Court pointed out that “the right to resist unlawful arrests, and other unlawful invasions of private rights, is well established in our state’s common law.” Although the resisting and obstructing statute was modified, the majority continued, “the Legislature expressed no intent to do away with the common-law right to resist an unlawful arrest.”

The Moreno dissent advanced a very dangerous doctrine, insisting that “the issue here is not whether the officers lawfully entered defendant’s house, but rather whether the officers were acting to further their employer’s … interests.”

“The fact that a municipality may be liable for an unlawful act of an officer if the act that was done in the course of the officer’s official duty or employment necessarily means that an officer can commit an unlawful act while `performing his or her duties,” observed the dissent. As long as police officers are about “their master’s business,” they have license to commit unlawful acts – and citizens have no choice but to submit.

Read the People v. Moreno opinion here.
http://courts.michigan.gov/supremeco...37-Opinion.pdf


Castle Doctrine Triumph: A Victory for the Right to Resist in Michigan REPUBLIC MAGAZINE | THE VOICE OF THE PATRIOT MOVEMENT

Support Your Local Police? “Stop Resisting!” Screams Milwaukee Cop as He Slugs Handcuffed, Unresisting Victim

Posted on 19 April 2012 by William Grigg

After a Milwaukee cop was caught on video repeatedly slugging a handcuffed, unresisting man while screaming “Stop resisting!” the department issued a statement describing this act of felonious aggravated battery as “focused strikes to gain compliance.”

Presumably, the cop’s use of such expressions as “Get out of the f****g car!” and “Shut your f*****g mouth!” were examples of the “focused” use of thug vulgarity, as well.

Jeffrey Strasser, the victim of this assault, was allegedly intoxicated while driving, and the assailants claimed that he had run a stop light while operating his Lamborghini without headlights. Those alleged delinquencies on Strasser’s part “endangered the public,” insists the department. The uniformed cretin who attacked the helpless man — whose inclination toward gratuitous violence and documented criminal inclinations pose a much more severe threat to public safety — will not be disciplined or transferred.

“If the internet has taught us anything, it is that cops appear to be trained to yell `stop resisting”’while beating or tasing citizens into submission,” comments photojournalist and police reform activist Carlos Miller. “I learned that after my first arrest when Miami police pounded my head into the pavement, which is why by my third arrest, I learned to beat them to the punch (no pun intended) by declaring, `I’m not resisting.’”

Until recently, police officers and rapists were the only people who could commit acts of violence in the serene confidence that their victims had been counseled not to resist. Fortunately, rape prevention courses now instruct potential victims to put up whatever resistance they can, and then seek help immediately. Unfortunately, victims of criminal violence by police are still expected to endure whatever the uniformed aggressor sees fit to inflict on them — and as Miller pointed out, police are trained to create a pretext for violence by exclaiming “Stop resisting!” even before the attack begins.

In Milwaukee, the line separating police from rapists is rather indistinct. This was demonstrated by the case of a single mother in (whose name has not been publicly disclosed) who was raped by Officer Ladmarald Cates when he responded to a 911 call after someone had hurled a brick through the woman’s bathroom window. After dismissing the woman’s boyfriend on an errand, Cates maneuvered the woman into the bathroom, where he forcibly sodomized and raped her.
Immediately after the assault, the woman — barefoot and wearing tattered clothing — ran screaming from the house. Cates stormed out of the house and grabbed the victim by the waist, causing her feet to strike his partner. This gave the officers an excuse to arrest the battered and traumatized woman for “assaulting an officer.”
She was taken to jail and held for 12 hours before receiving medical aid. After the hospital visit, she was sent back to jail for four days before being released without charges.
This was not Cates’s first assault — but the department wasn’t willing to take disciplinary action of any kind until DNA evidence corroborated the rape victim’s account. Instead of prosecuting Cates, the department fired him for “idling or loafing on duty.” He was convicted of federal civil rights charges on January 15. Cates is hardly representative of Milwaukee police officers — not because of his casual corruption, but because he has actually been punished: The department holds down the number two spot in the national police brutality rankings.
See the video here.



Published on Apr 18, 2012 by TheBestDocumentaries

MILWAUKEE -

The Milwaukee police department's internal affairs is investigating a report of excessive force after an officer was seen on video punching a drunken driving suspect who was lying face down.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported police had cleared the 42-year-old officer, Eric Ratzmann, of wrongdoing in the April 12 incident.


But Police Chief Edward Flynn says internal affairs is reinvestigating because officials recently realized the suspect, Jeffrey Strasser, complained of excessive force that night.

According to court records, Ratzmann had his police powers temporarily suspended two years ago due to mental health issues, and his ex-wife has twice sought domestic violence restraining orders against him.
Flynn declined to discuss Ratzmann's previous issues at Friday's news conference, only saying you can find something bad about anyone if you dig enough. "He abuses legal and illegal drugs, resulting in unstable, highly explosive episodes of rage over minute issues," his ex-wife wrote in 2010. "In the past, he has grabbed me, held me down, shook me and slapped me, resulting in bruises, pain and neck pain."

The officer, Eric Ratzmann, 42, was not disciplined in connection with either incident, according to his personnel record.


Milwaukee Police Officer Pounds Lamborghini Driver's Head


"Stop Resisting!" Yelled Milwaukee Cop, Beating Unresisting Victim REPUBLIC MAGAZINE | THE VOICE OF THE PATRIOT MOVEMENT



PS I used to bring infor over from this magazine and newsletter a while back here is the link if your interested you can sign up and get a free digital copy for free like I do from Republic Magazine

REPUBLIC MAGAZINE | THE VOICE OF THE PATRIOT MOVEMENT |