Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! They MUST make a judgement as to whether the arrest is valid. Else they are just stooges and anyone can arrest anyone anytime. They're fucked. Officer pigface is totally wrong when he says he had no choice. Especially when he has eyes to see. And the constant smirk on his face tells all. Major crimes happening behind him and he makes a citizen's arrest for trespassing. So next time, request that he arrest a $cientologist for unlawful imprisonment, fraud, assault, etc. Think he will say he has "no choice" but to effect the arrest?
Re: Absolutely right - video delayed And here's the California code cited on that ticket: CA Codes (pen:594-625c) [SIZE="4"]602.1. (a) Any person who intentionally interferes with any lawful business or occupation carried on by the owner or agent of a business establishment open to the public, by obstructing or intimidating those attempting to carry on business, or their customers, and who refuses to leave the premises of the business establishment after being requested to leave by the owner or the owner's agent, or by a peace officer acting at the request of the owner or owner's agent, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for up to 90 days, or by a fine of up to four hundred dollars ($400), or by both that imprisonment and fine.[/SIZE]
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! May be overly optimistic, but why didn't GB think of this and do it ? Can this be done in the future ?
California Laws - Trespassing, Arrest et al Excuse me, I didn't quote enough to cover the EXEMPTIONS to this particular law. 602.1. (a) Any person who intentionally interferes with any lawful business or occupation carried on by the owner or agent of a business establishment open to the public, by obstructing or intimidating those attempting to carry on business, or their customers, and who refuses to leave the premises of the business establishment after being requested to leave by the owner or the owner's agent, or by a peace officer acting at the request of the owner or owner's agent, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for up to 90 days, or by a fine of up to four hundred dollars ($400), or by both that imprisonment and fine. (b) Any person who intentionally interferes with any lawful business carried on by the employees of a public agency open to the public, by obstructing or intimidating those attempting to carry on business, or those persons there to transact business with the public agency, and who refuses to leave the premises of the public agency after being requested to leave by the office manager or a supervisor of the public agency, or by a peace officer acting at the request of the office manager or a supervisor of the public agency, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for up to 90 days, or by a fine of up to four hundred dollars ($400), or by both that imprisonment and fine. (c) This section shall not apply to any of the following persons: (1) Any person engaged in lawful labor union activities that are permitted to be carried out on the property by state or federal law. (2) Any person on the premises who is engaging in activities protected by the California Constitution or the United States Constitution. (d) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to supersede the application of any other law.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! WHY THE FUCK AREN'T THESE ASSHOLES BEING ARRESTED????? Unless i'm mistaken and the constitution has zero credibility anymore. To quote a shitty episode of South Park: I'M SORRY, BUT I THOUGHT THIS WAS AMERICA
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Article Citizen's Arrest, Criminal Defense Attorneys Dangers of Making an Erroneous Citizens Arrest Making a citizen's arrest maliciously or with insufficient evidence of wrongdoing by the arrested individual can lead to civil or criminal penalties. Additionally, it is in violation of a suspects rights for a citizen making an arrest to use unnecessary force, to intentionally harm the suspect, to hold the suspect in unsafe conditions, or to delay in turning the suspect over to authorities. A citizen making an arrest is acting in the place of an officer of the law, and as such, is required to uphold the same rights and civil liberties as an officer of the law must uphold. A citizen who violates a suspects rights, or who violates the applicable state law in detaining the suspect, (for example, arresting a suspect for a misdemeanor when the state statute requires a felony for a citizens arrest), risks being sued or even charged with a crime. Additionally, if it is found that the arresting party did not meet the pertinent state requirements for a citizens arrest, any contraband found on the suspect will have been found illegally, and charges may be dropped entirely. If you feel that you have been unfairly arrested by a citizen, or if you have been charged with illegally detaining a suspect during an illegitimate citizens arrest, it is important to seek the counsel of an experienced attorney. A good attorney will demonstrate familiarity with state laws, and as such will help you to ensure the best possible outcome of your case.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Now I think this info will stick in this case, when it was not so likely with the AO case. Where the AO case seemed flimsy, this case will prevail. No mountain out of molehills here. I smell EPIC WIN on many fronts : )
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Peace officers in the state of California are NOT obligated to accept a private person(s) arrest. Several years ago, peace officers were required to accept them, but the law was changed. I, myself, have turned away my fair share. At times, it can result in people getting pissed off and filing a complaint against the officer. I always explain the civil ramifications to citizens wishing to make an arrest. Most of the time, they change their mind. None the less, it is important for peace officers to conduct an investigation and be prudent when making a decision. In riverside County Sheriff's case, they have demonstrated that they do not conduct proper investigations prior to accepting a private person(s) arrest. They are an embarrassment to the law enforcement community.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Only makes sense that if an officer is on the scene and witnesses the incident that s/he has to make their own judgement. More so if they are not there.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Under section 4(b)2 of article XIII of the California Constitution, the Legislature has the authority to exempt property (1) used exclusively for religious, hospital, or charitable purposes, and (2) owned or held in trust by nonprofit organizations operating for those purposes. This exemption from property taxation, popularly known as the welfare exemption, was first adopted by voters as a constitutional amendment on November 7, 1944.3 With this amendment,California became the last of 48 states in the country to provide such an exemption from propertytaxes. The ballot language in favor of the amendment stated: These nonprofit organizations assist the people by providing important health, citizenship and welfare services. They are financed in whole or in part by your contributions either directly or through a Community Chest. It is good public policy to encourage such private agencies by exemption rather than to continue to penalize and discourage them by heavy taxation.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Yes, that is true, but we don't know all the facts yet. Were the deputies present prior to the protestors arrival? Were the deputies present with the protestors the entire time? If so, they should have been aware whether or not a violation of the law occurred. The fact of the matter is, we need more facts. I am tired of speculating. But knowing Mark Bunkers personality, general demeanor, and standard of morals, I would have a very hard time believing that he did anything wrong. Even if he was trespassing in some way, he has to be admonished and be given an opportunity to comply with the law before an arrest can be made. Im pulling my hair out here.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! ok a few things: I have seen the same thing with the Catholic Church and the minutemen. 602.1a is valid for the trespass as the other codes like 602.5 would not apply to any religious church. HOWEVER, 602.1a states that the trespass is not on residential property therefore you have a case to protest that area as the citation itself states it is not residential and therefore would not qualify for the targeted picketing in the new ordinance. If it were residential it would have been 602.5 If you want to know the tax exemption of that property go to the riverside county appraisal site Home page for the Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder of Riverside County Ca under "Property Information Center" and put in the address. It will list the tax exemptions on the left by code. I too saw the videos and while the cops were not consistent Mark did stop blatantly in the driveway to take a picture. Just be safe out there.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! ^^THIS^^ & ^^THAT^^ & ^^ WUT HE SAID ^^ not withstaning the officer who made the wellness check for Twin A who was totally 100% on the side of the angels and needs a good-cop-lotsadonuts.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! I just watched the second video, where the cop claims that he must respond to a citizen's arrest. That seems far-fetched, that implies that I could walk up to David Miscavige and demand that he be arrested for no reason and that the cops would be forced to act. Even if the police really must act, the bogus arrester must be subject to some sort of penalty, otherwise "bad people" would be arresting Scilons 24/7.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Ahab sez "Tahr she blows! Man de boats, harpoons a-ready! A piece of caek for them that brings us the Great Wite Fail!" XD (I crack me up sumtimes, the worst kind of comedian is one who laughs at their own jokes, ya, ya, just frikken shoot me *sigh*)
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Excellent! I wuz gonna stfu fer a bit but man this be a long/quick thread, so much goodness seepin' out, just hadda say there be some awesome takes on these developments and many worthy of serious consideration. Kudos to those compiling the important parts, this is creating a massive harpoon of Longcat preportions. Nao, as long as the tip don't get too big ta spear wee DaveyM...... (hm, no.#3 triple barb baited with vodka soaked 100$ bill?) *thumbs up*
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! You wouldn't happen to have a posting account at officer.com would you? Also, thread is getting too long when you see questions and answers repeated and repeated and repeated again.
California Laws - Trespassing, Arrest et al Sounds like a Subway moment, doesn't it... In reading this section, I can't help but wonder if Clearwater has the same kind of laws. Because if the cult tries to prevents a customer from entering a legal business, they'd be guilty. Does posting a NO ANON ALLOWED poster fall under the "obstructing or intimidating those attempting to carry on business, or their customers" clause here? And remember, this is a CALIFORNIA law, not a county law. They're going to try this at all the CA protests, now...
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! AFAIK, no. We did some research when it happened, and it appears Weasel-Face the scifag was right: Florida law is anyone can refuse to serve/allow inside anyone as long as they're not discriminating based on gender, race, or "creed".
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! For those interested in the California Penal Code as it relates to CITIZENS ARRESTS, I'll leave this here. CA Codes (pen:833-851.90) 847. (a) A private person who has arrested another for the commission of a public offense must, without unnecessary delay, take the person arrested before a magistrate, or deliver him or her to a peace officer. (b) There shall be no civil liability on the part of, and no cause of action shall arise against, any peace officer or federal criminal investigator or law enforcement officer described in subdivision (a) or (d) of Section 830.8, acting within the scope of his or her authority, for false arrest or false imprisonment arising out of any arrest under any of the following circumstances: (1) The arrest was lawful, or the peace officer, at the time of the arrest, had reasonable cause to believe the arrest was lawful. (2) The arrest was made pursuant to a charge made, upon reasonable cause, of the commission of a felony by the person to be arrested. (3) The arrest was made pursuant to the requirements of Section 142, 837, 838, or 839. 837. A private person may arrest another: 1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence. 2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his presence. 3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it. 839. Any person making an arrest may orally summon as many persons as he deems necessary to aid him therein. 142. (a) Any peace officer who has the authority to receive or arrest a person charged with a criminal offense and willfully refuses to receive or arrest that person shall be punished by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment in the state prison, or in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the sheriff may determine whether any jail, institution, or facility under his or her direction shall be designated as a reception, holding, or confinement facility, or shall be used for several of those purposes, and may designate the class of prisoners for which any facility shall be used. (c) This section shall not apply to arrests made pursuant to Section 837.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! I can't catch up on this thread, I'm about three pages behind. Lost was on and blew my mind. I feel this needs to be seen and remembered. These are two major issues to take away from this. 1. Since they (cos) used the CA statue 601.2(a) it sets precedence that this is indeed a business, not residential. Also, the exclusions therein exempts union picketers and anyone exercising their constitutional rights ie. protesting. Side note: What kind of 'charitable' business needs that kind of barbwire?? 2. Cathy made a citizen's arrest on a (disputable) misdmeanor offense in front of the police. They (PD) complied to this despite it being wrong. It needs to be a felony offense to call for a citizen's arrest. Trufax!
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Thanks for this. Very helpful. Sounds like they HAVE to arrest, but they don't. The officer still has to have reasonable cause to believe that the arrest is lawful. If the officer is there and DOESN'T see a crime, or sees that a crime didn't occur, then they can't possibly have reasonable cause to believe the arrest is lawful. I believe that there's some kind of common law rule that says they can't disbelieve their own eyes. And thus this would not be a "willful refusal to arrest" which would subject the officer to punishment. The law requires the officer to think. This is a good thing. Good policy. "Thinking is the hardest work of all. That's why so few of us engage in it."---Emerson
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! I don't see how this section is applicable, given that neither person had been charged.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! I can't see how it was a citizen's arrest, unless the cops were acting as agents of the CoS, because the CoS guys did not in fact restrain or "arrest" the Marks. An arrest requires a physical action communicating restraint, such as putting a hand on shoulder.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! pointing and saying "arrest him" doesnt count? cause I wanna do it, it looks so fun
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! The legal definition of "arrest" varies from state-to-state based on local court rulings.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Scientology can do a citizen's arrest. It does not need to be a felony if committed in the presence of the one doing the arresting. The Scientologist does the "charging" as the citizen. Tommy Davis says, "I saw him trespass. I am making a citizen's arrest. It is that guy over there." The cop has reasonable cause. The cop LIED. He did not have to take the Two Marks into custody (if he didn't eyewitness it to make the determination and be the person making the arrest) However, in his situation, if it did not happen in his presence for him to make the determination...I would have taken them into custody and let it be sorted out later. He is protected by the law if it didn't happen in his presence...but Tommy Davis is not and can be sued up the ying yang. The person doing the arresting has to sign paperwork (the cop on this thread can tell me if I am wrong) so the cop does know who did the citizen's arrest. If he said he does not know..he is lying again. "(c) This section shall not apply to arrests made pursuant to Section 837." Again, he lied about having no choice but to take them into custody. Don't be deceived by his good cop routine in checking on Twin B. Perhaps he was playing good cop out of the goodness of his heart. Perhaps not - he may have been doing it to diffuse a situation at the behest of Tommy Davis or so that he didn't get in trouble with Internal Affairs.We don't know his motives. The caveat to all of this is that it appears to me that the cop did see Mark Bunkers "illegal" activity so he had the ability to make an on the spot call as to whether he would be taken into custody. If the other Mark was subjected to arrest for standing where he was (versus some previous activity)..then again...the cop witnessed it and would have been able to make an on the spot determination. The bottom line is that the cop flat out lied about the law ( as he was playing good cop to Twin A). And protesters have no idea where they are allowed to protest without being arrested except for standing across the road. As AGP said, "THAT'S RIDICULOUS" when the cop said GB was trespassing when he was standing many feet away from the curb inlet. Scientology and the cops know they have GB on the run because GB likely doesn't want to be arrested right now since he is defending some of the protesters. So he will have to do whatever the cop says at that moment even if he knows it is ridiculous and not within what the lawyer for the county said he could do. Maybe GB should not play protester anymore and just play documentarian... The courts view the person filming and photographing an event differently than people who are doing the protesting...or at least they have in many of the cases I have looked at like the one I posted.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! I would have paid money to view a video of Tommy Davis and that woman dogpiling the Two Marks and screaming "You are under arrest" as they did AO.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! He saw everything. He will have to justify his determination that a crime occurred.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! I love it when they talk dirty. Also, Catherine Frasier is much hotter than Mary Panton. It wouldn't bother me if I had dreams of her "immobilizing" and "restraining" me.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! ^^^^^THIS^^^^^ Also... when Bunker goes to court... is it possible that the idiot cops can say that it was "too soon" after the hearing and they were not briefed in time? How long does it take the police department to brief its members after something has been passed? (although it wouldn't matter, as all of these cops seem to have their own interpretation of where the protestors are allowed to be) the cop kept saying, nope still blocking the entrance.... nope not there either... And at the police station the cops says they had no choice because it was a CITIZENS arrest. So where does Fraser get off making a citizens arrest if nobody knew where protestors can actually protest? Or am I talking out my ass?
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! That's exactly what I was thinking. It looks to me like officer pigface was just using that as an excuse.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! According to what has been posted here it has to be a felony. Trespassing is not a felony.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Neither is Tommy Davis wearing women's underwear. Looks like Anons may have cause for a CA of their own next raid!
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! A person in California can make a citizen's arrest for a misdemeanor if he witnesses the event. DM ..spying out a window can tell Tommy Davis to make a citizen's arrest on an Anon but Tommy Davis can't do it unless he witnesses the event. Of course, Tommy Davis can just lie and say he saw whatever DM told him to see. This code is NOT to be read as requiring EACH of the three events. 837. A private person may arrest another: 1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence. 2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his presence. 3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Yeah if only Tommy Davis were capable of being a lying puppet BAHHHHHHHHAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I couldnt hold that in any longer
Re: MARK BUNKER AND MARK LOWELL ARRESTED AT GOLD! Actually, yes, there are specific Jewtube Tommy David vid's proving that. I forgot to bookmark, though.
California Laws - Trespassing, Arrest et al At what point does the person have to sign paperwork, and what if they refuse to or "disappear" (get shipped to europe or something)? Is the documentation of the citizen's arrest available for public consumption, or is the only dox available the citation issued by the police officer acting on behalf of the citizen making the citizen's arrest?
