I think the verdict was correct.
Detention of a suspect waiting for police is one thing. Reasonable suspicion is a triable fact.
Threatening to blow his head off, and then doing it? That also is a matter for a jury, and I think the State would have gotten a conviction in all-white New Hampshire, Maine, or Vermont with the facts as I understand them.
I agree, and it doesn’t matter, they should have never pulled a gun on the guy. I have had a conceal carry permit for 20 years and the one thing the training officer taught us, if you can retreat or remove yourself from a situation do it. Never put yourself in a situation where a judge or jury will decide your freedom. They had contacted the police, let them do their job! Now, they will spend the rest of their lives in prison.
Symmetry: Three vigilantes who mistakenly thought they were justified in their unlawful attacks were brought to justice. Both times. But of course it’s better when the person dispensing that justice is the intended victim.
“I think the verdict was correct. Detention of a suspect waiting for police is one thing. Reasonable suspicion is a triable fact.”
Although I don’t know all the facts in this case, I suspect the jury reached the right decision. However, I do not believe it is okay to even detain someone on “suspicion” unless you are a law enforcement officer. I believe that would be kidnapping. I believe you must have witnessed the suspect commit a serious crime. In Texas, where I live, a “citizens arrest” is only lawful when the witness is of crimes that carry a minimum of one year incarceration upon conviction.
In other words, you can do a citizen’s arrest if you witness a murder, attempted murder, rape, or aggravated felony like armed robbery. Also, you must actually be capable of detaining the person. And you can only hold them until police arrive. You can handcuff them or otherwise restrain them, but I don’t think you can imprison them.