We're going to see a replay of the McMichael case here.
Posted on 05/25/2022 6:35:13 AM PDT by Bon of Babble
A father and two sons are facing charges for an incident in which they allegedly assaulted a suspect attempting to burglarize their family business.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
We're going to see a replay of the McMichael case here.
Bakersfield, California
Oh to be on the jury...
Beating the suspect after they had him subdued was a step too far.
Listen, everyone has their civil rights. Even thieves and burglars, and I don’t think people should be beating trespassers, at least not as a punishment. But why should police have the right to use commensurate force to subdue and detain a suspect, but property owners cannot use needed force to protect themselves and their property?
More information will come out, but the idea in general is should be questioned.
Brenden and Trenton Sparks arrived at the scene, and the three began to assault the suspect, punching, kicking, and striking him with blunt objects for approximately 45 minutes. They then loaded him into a pick-up truck and drove back to Sparks Custom Pools, where they later met the responding deputies.
Yeah, 45 minutes of beating up a sneak thief - off property, no less. Not a good visual.
And it took the deputies how long to respond?
“Beating the suspect after they had him subdued was a step too far.”
Their mistake was calling the cops at all.
L
Perhaps they should have beat him to death and then buried his body in the desert.
It was a pool company. Bet they could have disposed of him underneath a pool they were putting in.
“Perhaps they should have beat him to death and then buried his body in the desert.”
Dead men tell no tales.
L
Robbing the place was two steps too far.
Were I on that jury, I’d refuse to convict on a single charge.
While I believe this is appropriate in a world where police can only show up after the crime and write a report, one has to remember we mere citizens are not law enforcement and have to respond within the law ourselves.
While laws vary state to state, generally we have a right to defend ourselves in our home or dwelling (even a car might qualify) when we fear for our lives or the lives of others. Generally, again, if an intruder enters your home or dwelling, you are automatically considered in fear for your life, legally. (Know your own state laws as mileage will vary).
Handcuffing opens up a new can of legal risks. Improperly applied, it could be construed as unlawful detainment or detention. Police may detain. In many places security personnel can detain. Individuals detaining is legally sketchy depending on your state.
I am part of a church security team. We have cuffs if we need to detain someone. As part of the security team, we have some legal protection for that use, if justified (i.e. the perp attempted an aggressive act where threat of harm existed, like starting to throw a punch).
I also keep zip cuffs at home and in vehicle go bags, but those are for end of world, martial law scenarios (i.e. the BLM riots of 2020 come to your neighborhood). In that case I dont expect to see police coming to help for sometime if ever.
Probably need more info here, but it should be clear that too many Soros DA’s are happy to go after citizens defending themselves instead of the criminals. We are returning to the old west and frontier justice.
Beating the suspect after they had him subdued was a step too far.
Maybe, but this is California. It might be the only punishment he gets.
I think I saw that in Ozark.
Ironically if they would have just shot him dead they would have likely been fine (although this is far left California so maybe not). In most states killing a burglar is fine under Stand Your Ground / Castle Doctrine. But yeah, the legal system tends to frown on torturing them.
To be clear, I was referring to the cuffing. Not any alleged beatings.
Seriously. They’re old hands at digging/filling holes with a front-end loader. Easy peasy.
This is iffy. (I am in California, as is this case). A police neighbor told me if you plan on shooting them, "make sure they're inside the home, even if you have to drag them in" - no matter what the threat.
Husband always said (seriously) that he would hand me the gun if anyone broke into the home - I (as a female) would have a better chance of getting off. I'm also a better shot. Anyone gets past my dogs is going to get blasted, of that you can be sure.
Why? I find no moral failing in beating a thief. Our forefathers used rougher methods and eventually created a peaceful, civil society where crime was rare enough that courts and a police force could handle it. We no longer have that peaceful civil society so we need to return to the methods of our forefathers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.