• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Wrongful/False Arrest?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Just Blue

Senior Member
"The CHILD is LEGALLY not yours to find> The child was with a legal custodian of which this person WAS NOT the legal custodian. You could not have followed HER to get to the child because the child was with dad. As for tweeker and other slams? Watch yourself stalkerboy."

Again, how is that relevant to the charge??? And yes, she is a tweeker. It's why she doesn't have custody of her own children. It's documented in her divorce. "Stalkerboy"? Instead of resorting to name calling, you could have just said "disregard my earlier comment. It was something I pulled out of my ass. It had no legal merit".

Unless you can intelligently explain how it's is relevant in regards to the code I was charged under (which it isn't) please leave the thread.
You are asking the only attorney that has respond to your ...issue..to stop posting? Wow. Are you mentally challenged?
 


CGRAY

Member
The Arrest Was Legal and Valid

I have no idea why we have to continue traveling down this path. I have already accepted a concensus that the arrest was valid. See post 22. See post 44. According to everyone who commented, the arrest was valid. The arrest was valid. The arrest is valid. The arrest is valid. Can we move on please. I've been trying to since post 22. The arrest is valid. Can someone please tell me what to do so I can get that point across to everyone.

As for the police report online, its there. Just because it doesn't happen in your community, doesn't mean it doesn't in mine. I refuse to argue the point or discuss it. I viewed it. I downloaded it. Its in PDF format on the very same computer I'm typing this on. I have it. Its not a figment of my imagination. Its there on the web and its here on my computer. I got it.

Ladyback
1) you conducted surveillance on and followed a person.
You had no legal basis for your action(s) WHERE IS CODE THAT STATES I CANNOT DO THIS AS LONG AS MY INTENT IS NOT TO HARASS OR INTIMIDATE? THAT'S WHAT IM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.

2) you skulked around in the dark to do these activities AGAIN WE HAVE A CASE OF SOMEONE ASSUMING SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT SUBMITTED BY ME. AT NO TIME DID I MENTION THAT THIS HAPPENED IN THE DARK. 1636 ACCORDING TO THE POLICE REPORT.

3) obviously they were afraid (from a law enforcement standpoint) if they felt the need to arm themselves (with a baseball bat) ACTUALLY, VICTIM'S REPORT DOES NOT MENTION THIS OCCURED. ACCORDING TO GEORGIA CODE, THAT ACTION IS CONSIDERED SIMPLE ASSAULT. JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE IS WATCHING YOU FROM OUTSIDE YOUR PROPERTY, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO GO AFTER THEM WITH A DANGEROUS INSTRUMENT/DEADLY WEAPON.

Does anyone have any other direct knowledge as to how the prosecution may try to prove their case? Is there some segment of the code that I am missing? CDJ provided a couple possibilities. I already have evidence to refute those. Not a problem.
 

Just Blue

Senior Member
As you are RUDE and overstepping legal stranger...go consult your attorney and pay her/him to assist. Or find the answers you want for yourself.

Blue
 

Ladyback1

Senior Member
I have no idea why we have to continue traveling down this path. I have already accepted a concensus that the arrest was valid. See post 22. See post 44. According to everyone who commented, the arrest was valid. The arrest was valid. The arrest is valid. The arrest is valid. Can we move on please. I've been trying to since post 22. The arrest is valid. Can someone please tell me what to do so I can get that point across to everyone.

As for the police report online, its there. Just because it doesn't happen in your community, doesn't mean it doesn't in mine. I refuse to argue the point or discuss it. I viewed it. I downloaded it. Its in PDF format on the very same computer I'm typing this on. I have it. Its not a figment of my imagination. Its there on the web and its here on my computer. I got it.

Ladyback
1) you conducted surveillance on and followed a person.
You had no legal basis for your action(s) WHERE IS CODE THAT STATES I CANNOT DO THIS AS LONG AS MY INTENT IS NOT TO HARASS OR INTIMIDATE? THAT'S WHAT IM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.

2) you skulked around in the dark to do these activities AGAIN WE HAVE A CASE OF SOMEONE ASSUMING SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT SUBMITTED BY ME. AT NO TIME DID I MENTION THAT THIS HAPPENED IN THE DARK. 1636 ACCORDING TO THE POLICE REPORT.

3) obviously they were afraid (from a law enforcement standpoint) if they felt the need to arm themselves (with a baseball bat) ACTUALLY, VICTIM'S REPORT DOES NOT MENTION THIS OCCURED. ACCORDING TO GEORGIA CODE, THAT ACTION IS CONSIDERED SIMPLE ASSAULT. JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE IS WATCHING YOU FROM OUTSIDE YOUR PROPERTY, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO GO AFTER THEM WITH A DANGEROUS INSTRUMENT/DEADLY WEAPON.

Does anyone have any other direct knowledge as to how the prosecution may try to prove their case? Is there some segment of the code that I am missing? CDJ provided a couple possibilities. I already have evidence to refute those. Not a problem.
Whatever dude...you have it set in your mind that you did nothing wrong.
You will not look at the situation with any sense of objectivity.
Reasonable apprehension of harm is usually enough to convince judge/jury that regardless of your intent, that was the intent perceived by the victim. Regardless of you actual intent, the judge/jury may take the position that the victim felt your intent was malicious.

As far as "simple assault"--does your state recognize the Castle doctrine? Or has the Castle doctrine been used in any case law/legal precedence? That can negate the simple assault argument.
And the Castle doctrine is very vague in it's interpretation by the courts.
 

ERAUPIKE

Senior Member
I have no idea why we have to continue traveling down this path. I have already accepted a concensus that the arrest was valid. See post 22. See post 44. According to everyone who commented, the arrest was valid. The arrest was valid. The arrest is valid. The arrest is valid. Can we move on please. I've been trying to since post 22. The arrest is valid. Can someone please tell me what to do so I can get that point across to everyone.
Maybe you should try starting every post like that. I'm sure it will espouse a fountain of cheerful responses to your pleas for help with your dire situation.

Ladyback
1) you conducted surveillance on and followed a person.
You had no legal basis for your action(s) WHERE IS CODE THAT STATES I CANNOT DO THIS AS LONG AS MY INTENT IS NOT TO HARASS OR INTIMIDATE? THAT'S WHAT IM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.
You weren't charged with that code, so it is irrelevant.

2) you skulked around in the dark to do these activities AGAIN WE HAVE A CASE OF SOMEONE ASSUMING SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT SUBMITTED BY ME. AT NO TIME DID I MENTION THAT THIS HAPPENED IN THE DARK. 1636 ACCORDING TO THE POLICE REPORT.
Reference: Figure of speech.

3) obviously they were afraid (from a law enforcement standpoint) if they felt the need to arm themselves (with a baseball bat) ACTUALLY, VICTIM'S REPORT DOES NOT MENTION THIS OCCURED. ACCORDING TO GEORGIA CODE, THAT ACTION IS CONSIDERED SIMPLE ASSAULT. JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE IS WATCHING YOU FROM OUTSIDE YOUR PROPERTY, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO GO AFTER THEM WITH A DANGEROUS INSTRUMENT/DEADLY WEAPON.
Reference: Stand Your Ground Laws (State of Georgia)

Does anyone have any other direct knowledge as to how the prosecution may try to prove their case?
They will take the evidence and present it to the court.

Is there some segment of the code that I am missing? CDJ provided a couple possibilities. I already have evidence to refute those. Not a problem.
If you are intent on proving that you didn't intend or actually intimidate the victim in this case, I would leave out the part about them running at you with a bat.
 
1) you conducted surveillance on and followed a person. You had no legal basis for your action(s)
2) you skulked around in the dark to do these activities
If the "victiim" is unawares is this a crime?
If you are off property(and apparently unarmed) what is the danger to the "victim" to be surveiled by a concerned parent?
Doesnt stand your ground assume the attacker is on the property?
 

Ladyback1

Senior Member
If the "victiim" is unawares is this a crime?
If you are off property(and apparently unarmed) what is the danger to the "victim" to be surveiled by a concerned parent?
Doesnt stand your ground assume the attacker is on the property?
If someone (like the neighbor teen watching through your bedroom window) takes pornographic pictures of you and plasters them on a website--and you don't know about it, are you still a victim and is it still a crime?

If the person being watched is unaware of the exact intentions then there can be perceived danger.

I have no experience with "stand your ground"--however, The Castle Doctrine I know a little about (not much), and The Castle Doctrine can be applied pretty broadly and is rather vague ( I have seen it applied to the concept of secure in your person...)
 
If someone (like the neighbor teen watching through your bedroom window) takes pornographic pictures of you and plasters them on a website--and you don't know about it, are you still a victim and is it still a crime?

If the person being watched is unaware of the exact intentions then there can be perceived danger.

I have no experience with "stand your ground"--however, The Castle Doctrine I know a little about (not much), and The Castle Doctrine can be applied pretty broadly and is rather vague ( I have seen it applied to the concept of secure in your person...)
If I have a reasonable expectation of privacy and they violate it then whoa is them. Also, if they post pictures of me I want a percentage. Most men would be jealous of my endowments so Im sure it would carry a cash value. :)

Who perceived the danger? I can carry a rifle thru the woods without being menacing to anyone(damned wolves). It would be unadvised to go creepin thru my exes yard with a rifle

Stand your ground is afaik most often limited to ones domicile. Some are broader in application but as ive read you must be protecting yourself or your family from immediate bodily danger or at least be in fear of it. If they are unarmed and hiding Im not sure there is any immediate danger. Now Im curious if a baseball bat is considered a deadly weapon. :p
 

Ladyback1

Senior Member
If I have a reasonable expectation of privacy and they violate it then whoa is them. Also, if they post pictures of me I want a percentage. Most men would be jealous of my endowments so Im sure it would carry a cash value. :)

Who perceived the danger? I can carry a rifle thru the woods without being menacing to anyone(damned wolves). It would be unadvised to go creepin thru my exes yard with a rifle

Stand your ground is afaik most often limited to ones domicile. Some are broader in application but as ive read you must be protecting yourself or your family from immediate bodily danger or at least be in fear of it. If they are unarmed and hiding Im not sure there is any immediate danger. Now Im curious if a baseball bat is considered a deadly weapon. :p
LOL:D I'm sure your endowments are a sight to behold--nevertheless, who you show them to should be up to you, right??:p;)
 
"Law . an unlawful physical attack upon another; an attempt or offer to do violence to another, with or without battery, as by holding a stone or club in a threatening manner."

I really like the part about the club.
 

ERAUPIKE

Senior Member
If the "victiim" is unawares is this a crime?
If you are off property(and apparently unarmed) what is the danger to the "victim" to be surveiled by a concerned parent?
Doesnt stand your ground assume the attacker is on the property?
Stand your ground is not limited to your own property. The only assumption is the one you are making about the law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top