How does citizen's arrest work?

[NickBallard]

How does citizen's arrest work? How do you do it and make it legal? The reason I ask is because you hear about all of these retreat laws and how you can't protect your property but instead have to run away. I've heard that you need a good reason to perform a citizen's arrest, but if the criminal's doing the crime to you, that's like a LEO catching someone at the scene of the crime. Let's say that someone's in your home and has a gun; instead of going to your retreat room, you perform a citizen's arrest (and of course you're armed because a police officer would be). Let's say that as you're walking up to your car, you see that your window's broken and someone is grabbing all of these things from your car. Of course you're not going to pull out your gun, because the police wouldn't, but what if you were to say, "Citizen's arrest" then they started running and you pepper spray the burglar so that you can hold him until police arrive to place him into custody, or maybe just taser him since police very frequently do that to running suspects that they catch at the scene of the crime. Or let's say that someone commits battery on you and then they stop the attack once they notice that you have non-lethal weapons. Normally you couldn't do anything because the attack is over for the moment. But what if you say "Citizen's arrest" (or whatever you're supposed to do). They say, "I'm going to hurt you," and then you do what the police would do, try to diffuse the situation verbally and if that doesn't work pull out your pepper spray, give a warning that you'll use it, if that doesn't work then spray. It's quite dangerous to let the assailant loose. They may hurt someone else or look for you later, so the justice system needs to take care of them. How does citizen's arrest work?

 

[Baba Louie]

How does citizen's arrest work?

First, you must detain said BG, which might be a violation of his rights (kidnapping?) unless you have other credible witness' to testify in your behalf... so you must have some use of force... always a tricky subject, especially if you have little to no training in the continuum of force and technique.

Then you must get said BG to "The Authorities" with adequate evidence that he is truly a BG and is guilty of an "Arrestable" offense. Is he a wanted felon? Some punk who ripped you off? Some guy you caught sneaking out of your bedroom window whom your wife may or may not know?

Or you get the "Authorities" to come to you to take BG downtown. How and why did you detain him? For how long? Again, are there others willing to testify on your behalf... and conversely, are there others willing to testify on the BG's behalf (and you KNOW they'd never tell a lie, right?)?

Just how willing are you to become an active player in the world of law and law enforcement, making sure your i's are dotted and your t's are crossed properly? Are you prepared for the countersuits for wrongful arrest, kidnapping, etc that will likely come against you (especially if you have anything worthy to lose, like money from Insurance Coverage)? Are you prepared to testify against him in a court of law? Willing to face the wrath of his friends and peers later on?

You and I certainly have the right and the obligation to keep criminals and crime at bay, or at least away from and outside your day to day life. Just remember that you and I are not trained professionals in that regard and each and every action you take will be looked at by BOTH sides (Law and BG's law team) under some type of microscope with some consequences as a result, be they good or bad.

Not much help, was I? And all of the above advice was worth every penny you paid for as well...

 

[pcf]

Don't do it, unless the police refuse to make an arrest and your life will be in danger if the badguy is not arrested.

Citizen's Arrest, if it's legal in your state, is the same as a sworn placing police officer placing someone under arrest. You have to affect the arrest in an appropiate and lawful manner. That includes all the paperwork and all the legal liability. You may have to testify in court about said arrest. If you screw up, you may face criminal charges and a civil suit.

If you can place someone under citizen's arrest, you can just as easily detain them and wait until the police arrive (which you have to do with a citizen's arrest).

 

[bakert]

I've always been of the opinion that making a citizens arrest was a good way to get a good A--whuppin' or worse. Let the police do it. May be legal in your area but too much hassle(and maybe danger) for the average person. The same with "detaining" a person in your home. If you can get him out the door without getting hurt let the police handle the rest. JMO.

 

[Whirlwind06]

When I hear Citizens Arrest I think of 2 things:

1) I remember watching the "Cops" show a few years ago. Don't remember the city or state it was filmed in though. A private citizen witnessed a crime (an assault I think) and called the police, and gave a good description. When the police pulled the guy over. They had the citizen ID the guy then told that him since they didn't see the crime happen he needed to make a citizen arrest then they would take it from there.

2) I keep hearing Gomer Pyle from the Andy Griffith show yelling "Citizens Arrest! Citizens Arrest!"

 

[Roadwild17]

Y bother? Eater the BG is a danger to your life/life of others (skip the arrest stage and use force if needed) or a punk trying to grab your stereo from your car. Are you willing to be sued for you car because you violated a punks rights/kidnapped him over a stereo?

 

[TallPine]

Heart arrest, maybe ...?

 

[mete]

You'd be on VERY thin legal ice !! Besides what do you do if he says no and walks away ? Assault him , shoot him ???

 

[Dbl0Kevin]

How does citizen's arrest work?

Not very well....

Every citizen has the right to place someone under arrest just as a police officer does. HOWEVER, there is a major difference between the two. A police officer has immunity against charges such as illegal arrest and such if the person arrested is not convicted where a citizen does NOT. So if you make a citizen's arrest you better be damn sure you have a good reason and it's something you want to stake a whole lot of your life's saving's on.

 

[NickBallard]

But do the police usually do anything???

Do the police usually take care of the problem? Often police won't do anything unless they see the crime in action. When people report being robbed, all that happens is the police take down a report and the thief is never caught and convicted, the same for assault. If you see it in action, because it's happening to you, then you've caught them at the scene of the crime. Also, the police hear the excuse "self-defense" all the time when they respond to incidents, even from both sides. So even innocent citizens who were involved in reasonable force self-defense are convicted every year because even though it's innocent until proven guilty, with the self-defense claim it's "the burden of proof is on you". So if you use citizen's arrest, would you be able to better legally protect yourself? Like if someone walks up to you and says, "Give me your money or I'll hurt you," and then pulls out a knife. If you taser him, and then run away (retreat), the prosecuting attorney will point out that you didn't hand over your wallet so the use of force wasn't your last resort, and that you running away makes you suspicious. If they say "Give me your money" and you say "citizen's arrest" then the person shouts, "That's it!" and pulls out a knife and then you taser the person, then you have a different defense.

 

[Trebor]

Nick, no offense, but I suggest you talk with an attorney who does criminal work in your state and who is familiar with the laws regarding deadly force and how those cases are viewed by your jurisdiction. I think that would give you a clearer understanding of the risks of "Citizen's arrest" and the role it does, or doesn't, play in self-defense.

I think you are operating under some serious misconceptions, but I don't have the legal background to give your the correct info. Get the info straight from the horses mouth, sort to speak.

 

[Dbl0Kevin]

Do the police usually take care of the problem? Often police won't do anything unless they see the crime in action.

Most times it has nothing to do with won't. If the police do not witness a misdemeaner or a disorderly persons offense as they're called in NJ then the police cannot make an arrest. In situations such as that what we do is ask the citizen involved if they want to press charges. If they do we would then process the suspect as if we had arrested him, type up the complaint and have the citizen sign it. More often than not when I would explain to someone this involved signing their name to the complaint and testifying in court they would say "oh.....well just read him the riot act then"

Also, the police hear the excuse "self-defense" all the time when they respond to incidents, even from both sides.

If you're referring to a physical fight then in such a situation we would talk to both parties and if neither wanted to file charges it would be a wash. Otherwise they would sign cross-complaints against each other and it would go in front of the judge to decide.

Like if someone walks up to you and says, "Give me your money or I'll hurt you," and then pulls out a knife. If you taser him, and then run away (retreat), the prosecuting attorney will point out that you didn't hand over your wallet so the use of force wasn't your last resort, and that you running away makes you suspicious.

If you ran away then how would anyone know it was you? Do you think the mugger is going to call the police? Very doubtful.

 

[NickBallard]

If you ran away then how would anyone know it was you? Do you think the mugger is going to call the police? Very doubtful.

That's what I was thinking at first, but then I found out that Taser International actually has all of these small tags with serial numbers that pop out all over the place when you shoot one. it's really difficult to pick all of them up and they can be traced to the person who bought the taser, through Taser International, quite easily. The thief may have a good lawyer and decide to sue saying something like, "For goodness sake, my client just pulled out of knife. People do that all the time and no one gets hurt. The other guy didn't exhaust all of his options before he relied on taser force. He could have just given him his wallet," or something stupid like that. Some lawyers will really twist things around. Also, if someone's trying to rob you, will you just decide not to press charges so that the case will be dropped if the thief decides not to press charges because you used your taser to get away from his knife?

 

[NickBallard]

One of the reason's I was wondering is if you travel across the country. I know it's going to differ from state to state, but are there any common patterns? Let's say you're on vacation and someone decides to rob you and air tasers are legal in that state? Just checking because it's good to be prepared.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

I know two women who detained a burglar at gunpoint until
the police arrived to arrest the burglar. A burglar lying in the
floorboard of your car disassembling your stereo with a screwdriver
is armed (screwdriver) and if allowed up is an immimemt threat
of death or bodily harm. I do not know all the legal niceties of
this but it worked out well in the end.

It would be nice to hear from real lawyers from a reasonable
sample of juridictions:
- What is the legality of detaining a suspect for arrest by
properly constituted authority?
- How does this relate to citizen's arrest?

 

[1wildbill]

How does citizen's arrest work?

Not very well....

Took the words right from my mouth. We put it veryy well I think.

 

[Lupinus]

Not a good idea.

 

[cbsbyte]

If I remember correctly a citizen can not use force or threats to detain someone during a citizens arrest. This probably varies depending on local and state laws if the state even allows citizen arrest.

 

[k_semler]

Yes I can. I can also legally kill under certian circumstances with civil immunity, and all lawful uses of force are exempt from either criminal prosecution, or civil suit. All court costs are reimbursed by WA State in cases dismissed due to self-defense, or defense of another within my presence There is no "duty to retreat" in WA state, and I can use lethal force to defend property.

"I am placing you under citizen's arrest. Do not move. Any move you make will be regarded as hostile, and I will react accordingly."

The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:

(1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;

(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;

(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;

(4) Whenever reasonably used by a person to detain someone who enters or remains unlawfully in a building or on real property lawfully in the possession of such person, so long as such detention is reasonable in duration and manner to investigate the reason for the detained person's presence on the premises, and so long as the premises in question did not reasonably appear to be intended to be open to members of the public;

(5) Whenever used by a carrier of passengers or the carrier's authorized agent or servant, or other person assisting them at their request in expelling from a carriage, railway car, vessel, or other vehicle, a passenger who refuses to obey a lawful and reasonable regulation prescribed for the conduct of passengers, if such vehicle has first been stopped and the force used is not more than is necessary to expel the offender with reasonable regard to the offender's personal safety;

(6) Whenever used by any person to prevent a mentally ill, mentally incompetent, or mentally disabled person from committing an act dangerous to any person, or in enforcing necessary restraint for the protection or restoration to health of the person, during such period only as is necessary to obtain legal authority for the restraint or custody of the person.

Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.

(1) No person in the state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting by any reasonable means necessary, himself or herself, his or her family, or his or her real or personal property, or for coming to the aid of another who is in imminent danger of or the victim of assault, robbery, kidnapping, arson, burglary, rape, murder, or any other violent crime as defined in RCW 9.94A.030.

(2) When a person charged with a crime listed in subsection (1) of this section is found not guilty by reason of self-defense, the state of Washington shall reimburse the defendant for all reasonable costs, including loss of time, legal fees incurred, and other expenses involved in his or her defense. This reimbursement is not an independent cause of action. To award these reasonable costs the trier of fact must find that the defendant's claim of self-defense was sustained by a preponderance of the evidence. If the trier of fact makes a determination of self-defense, the judge shall determine the amount of the award.

(3) Notwithstanding a finding that a defendant's actions were justified by self-defense, if the trier of fact also determines that the defendant was engaged in criminal conduct substantially related to the events giving rise to the charges filed against the defendant the judge may deny or reduce the amount of the award. In determining the amount of the award, the judge shall also consider the seriousness of the initial criminal conduct.

Nothing in this section precludes the legislature from using the sundry claims process to grant an award where none was granted under this section or to grant a higher award than one granted under this section.

(4) Whenever the issue of self-defense under this section is decided by a judge, the judge shall consider the same questions as must be answered in the special verdict under subsection (4) [(5)] of this section.

(5) Whenever the issue of self-defense under this section has been submitted to a jury, and the jury has found the defendant not guilty, the court shall instruct the jury to return a special verdict in substantially the following form:


answer yes or no
1. Was the finding of not guilty based upon self-defense? . . . . .
2. If your answer to question 1 is no, do not answer the remaining question.
3. If your answer to question 1 is yes, was the defendant:
a. Protecting himself or herself? . . . . .
b. Protecting his or her family? . . . . .
c. Protecting his or her property? . . . . .
d. Coming to the aid of another who was in imminent danger of a heinous crime? . . . . .
e. Coming to the aid of another who was the victim of a heinous crime? . . . . .
f. Engaged in criminal conduct substantially related to the events giving rise to the crime with which the defendant is charged? . . . . .

 

[Spreadfire Arms]

it depends on the state that you are in, really. for California, when a misdemeanor is not committed in a peace officer's presence, and it is not one of these 4 crimes:

1. weapons on school grounds
2. misdemeanor domestic violence
3. carry concealed weapon
4. offense committed by a juvenile (under 18)

the officer cannot make a lawful arrest.

in order to arrest the suspect, an officer has to have the citizen who witnessed the offense place that person under "private person's" or "citizen's" arrest. that is because the law does not allow a peace officer in California to arrest on a misdemeanor not committed in his/her presence (unless it is one of the 4 exceptions listed above). the law does, however, mandate a peace officer MUST take that person into custody after that person is placed under citizen's arrest and the citizen making the arrest is brought to said peace officer.

that peace officer then can either book that suspect into jail or release him on charges pending (or no charges if he/she believes no crime has been committed - see 849(b) Penal Code).

this law varies state-to-state. this is an example using California law.

 

[orangeninja]

Citizen's arrest works like this. You say "citizen's arrest"...........if perp doesn't kick your sweet lilly behind the cops show up................if the cops agree that you have an arrestable offense and you are willing to sign the complaint then they transfer custody to themselves.........if not, they release the guy who is free to charge you with assault at the least up to potential kidnapping or false imprisonment...................if the cops transfer the arrest, the burden of proof is on you........hope you like court.............if convicted be prepared to testify at appeals which he will gladly use his freely provided attorney to do so with..................hope you like court......................also whether there is a conviction or not be prepared to be sued for whatever it is you did to him that he feels like he can exploit................sometimes with the same said court appointed attorney....................hope you like court..................that is unless the arrest goes bad in which you are charged...............did I mention I hope you like court?


Citizens arrest can be a real stinker unless you REALLY KNOW WHAT THE HECK IT IS YOU ARE DOING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't stress this enough. You as a private citizen are protected by exactly SQUAT!!! So generally a "detainment" is in order and allow the officer to determine the arrest..........provided you don't get your sweet lilly tookus kicked.

 

[MarkDido]

1) I remember watching the "Cops" show a few years ago. Don't remember the city or state it was filmed in though. A private citizen witnessed a crime (an assault I think) and called the police, and gave a good description. When the police pulled the guy over. They had the citizen ID the guy then told that him since they didn't see the crime happen he needed to make a citizen arrest then they would take it from there.

Horse-hockey.....

If a citizen witnessed a crime AND positively ID'ed the BG, the police had more than enough probable cause to arrest him....

 

[NickBallard]

A Question For You

If someone pick pockets you when you're walking out of a store and then you see the guy with your wallet, isn't that probable cause if you do a citizen's arrest? My concern is that the use of force (even non-lethal and pepper spray) on public property is generally only legal for protection of self, not property. So by performing a citizen's arrest, that may make it legal to manually pry your property out of the other guy's hands so that you can get it back, since that's considered force. Or if you tell a guy you catch smashing in your car window that he needs to stick around to talk to the police, and he tries to run away, you can pepper spray him so that you can hold him until the police arrive (since pepper spray is legal in arrests where the person tries to run away, and speaking from a realistic point of view you know if he gets away the police probably will never talk to him). Wouldn't "citizen's arrest" help you out in these situations?

 

[orangeninja]

Nick, without the proper training and equipment and backup, making a citizens arrest on even a small guy can be fatal. Holding someone against their will is very, very difficult, why do you think most cops use backup.....and they have a psychological and real advantage of training, authority, uniform, backup, reputation, visible means of force, etc. You do not.

In the case of property theft, be a good live witness instead of a dead or beat down victim. If you are not authorized to use OC, don't create a situation to where you can. This is called escalation or inciting and can hold liabilities and penalties all its own.

When active resistance takes place, cops don’t fight fair; we use every tool and officer we can find. A one on one fight is not smart. I have seen where it took 4 very large male officers to subdue one active female offender……I’m not saying you ain’t got it, but I strongly, strongly urge you not to try it.

And BTW……citizens arrest is rarely just cause for force. Some exceptions I can think of are private security operations at retailers, etc. Even then, they have a strict code of procedures and state guidelines to follow and most have a no pursuit policy, losing a $50.00 bottle of perfume is cheaper than paying off in a lawsuit for injury sustained during an arrest.

 

[Jeff White]

The laws about citizens arrest vary from state to state. Here is the Illinois law:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilc...2&ActName=Code+of+Criminal+Procedure+of+1963.

(725 ILCS 5/107‑3) (from Ch. 38, par. 107‑3)
Sec. 107‑3. Arrest by private person.
Any person may arrest another when he has reasonable grounds to believe that an offense other than an ordinance violation is being committed.
(Source: Laws 1963, p. 2836.)

You should note that it says the private person may arrest another when he has resonable grounds to believe an offense is being committed. That doesn't mean has been committed it means is being committed in front of you.

As for use of force to make an arrest:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilc...SeqEnd=9300000&ActName=Criminal+Code+of+1961.

(720 ILCS 5/7‑6) (from Ch. 38, par. 7‑6)
Sec. 7‑6. Private person's use of force in making arrest.
(a) A private person who makes, or assists another private person in making a lawful arrest is justified in the use of any force which he would be justified in using if he were summoned or directed by a peace officer to make such arrest, except that he is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm only when he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another.
(b) A private person who is summoned or directed by a peace officer to assist in making an arrest which is unlawful, is justified in the use of any force which he would be justified in using if the arrest were lawful, unless he knows that the arrest is unlawful.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.)

As you can see you can use the use same force that a peace officer would be permitted to use. However, as a private citizen, you aren't covered by the civil torts act. So you can be and (if you have any assets) most likely will be sued for that use of force. You will have to bear the entire cost of your defense yourself. So even if you win a baseless suit over your use of force to make a citizen's arrest, you most likely will have spent most of your assets defending yourself. So you have to ask yourself is the pickpocket you just peppersprayed worth $50-100,000.00?

You can expect the plaintiffs lawyer to claim that you were untrained and inexperienced in making the arrest and your lack of training and experience caused his poor client great physical and unending emotional damage.

And then there is the possiblilty of criminal charges for unlawful use of weapons and unlawful restraint if you don't read the situation just right and you jump in and pepperspray someone who's rehersing for an acting role, playing some kind of weird roleplaying game or even undergoing a fraternity initiation.

Jeff