“Suspect” isn’t actionable re: citizen’s arrest.
They didn’t witness him actually commit an actionable crime. Trespassing isn’t actionable; the owner may have (and later did) permitted.
_________________________________________________________
What’s your authority for this claim? As an attorney, I can guarantee you that arrests are made (legally) every single day based on suspicion. It’s called probable cause, a very low standard. Police and citizens have the same standard as to probable cause. The only difference between a cop and a citizen is that cops are given authority to arrest in a wider range of cases. For example, unlike a citizen, a cop is authorized to arrest for a domestic violence assault, even though it’s a misdemeanor that occurred outside of his presence. In this case, the McMichaels had a prior encounter with Arbery who was prowling in and out of the house. He ran away when spotted. The owner called the cops. Less than 2 weeks later, the same guy was seen SPRINTING from the same house when spotted. Is it possible that Arbery was sneaking in and out of this house just for fun? Yes. Is it possible that he got busted twice before he could steal anything? Yes. Bottom line: If a cop could have detained Arbery, a citizen could have also. And are you telling me that if a cop had witnessed Arbery TWICE bolting from a home he clearly didn’t belong in, in a community that had a rash of property crimes, that the cop couldn’t have pursued him and stopped him? You and others keep saying “trespass.” The defendants will say “burglary” or “attempted burglary.” Is there probable cause that Arbery was ATTEMPTING to commit a burglary? YES!!!!!!!! I can direct you to hundreds of court cases that have held that FLIGHT of a suspect is about 95% of what’s needed for probable cause. The issue in this case isn’t whether the defendants had authority or legal justification to stop Arbery, it’s whether the FORCE they used was “reasonable under the totality of the circumstances.” People who are obsessing on probable cause are barking down the wrong rabbit hole.
I will note your post and review it with interest as this plays out. In strict read of the law (which will happen in such a high profile case), I suspect the normal operating margins you note will be disallowed. Strong case for “they didn’t see him do anything wrong, case closed” trumping “that’s how we always do it”.