wrongful arrest

[b322da]

I must have missed something what happened in Waco? and when?

They're talking about the Branch Davidian compound raid in 1983 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ah thanks, before my time.

A very poignant, while candid and honest comment, Paul. Another look at the institutional memory of our nation. We oldsters look at the present with the shadow of the past affecting our position, while the younger generations get to start anew. Is one better than the other? I cannot answer that question, but I do want to thank you for the reminder, Paul. We old-timers need such a reminder every now and then.

Elmo

[pbwalker]

I must have missed something what happened in Waco? and when?

They're talking about the Branch Davidian compound raid in 1983 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ah thanks, before my time.

1993...still before your time?

[paulhailes]

I must have missed something what happened in Waco? and when?

They're talking about the Branch Davidian compound raid in 1983 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ah thanks, before my time.

1993...still before your time?

oops looks like Keith hit the 8 instead of the 9, and I didn't notice the difference when I read the article. So no it was not before my time since I was about 4, but it was in a period of my life where I would most likely not have known nor cared what was going on because it had nothing to do with legos, cartoons or invisible spaceships that were attached to my swing.

A very poignant, while candid and honest comment, Paul. Another look at the institutional memory of our nation. We oldsters look at the present with the shadow of the past affecting our position, while the younger generations get to start anew. Is one better than the other? I cannot answer that question, but I do want to thank you for the reminder, Paul. We old-timers need such a reminder every now and then.

It is a sad think how quick a nation forgets things, I was a history major in college and would be amazed at what my friends didn't know about history, I mean how can you learn from the past if you don't know what happened and why?

A problem I have with some history classes is the idea that it has to have happened a long time ago before you can talk about it, however in a POLS class it could have happened yesterday and we would have been talking about it today. So a lot of people grow up not knowing what happened right before they were born or even what happened during their early years.

So it looks like this did happen during my time but I just didn't know, please forgive as a history buff I try to keep up with things but alas you cant know everything.

[pbwalker]

I must have missed something what happened in Waco? and when?

They're talking about the Branch Davidian compound raid in 1983 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ah thanks, before my time.

1993...still before your time?

oops looks like Keith hit the 8 instead of the 9, and I didn't notice the difference when I read the article. So no it was not before my time since I was about 4, but it was in a period of my life where I would most likely not have known nor cared what was going on because it had nothing to do with legos, cartoons or invisible spaceships that were attached to my swing.

4?? Oh man, I feel old and I'm only 32!

[paulhailes]

4?? Oh man, I feel old and I'm only 32!

My dad says you are only as old as you think you are, most of the time he is younger than me

[Wysiwyg101]

I think you are referring to the Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C 1385. It applies to all five federal military services now save one, the U. S. Coast Guard, and it does not apply to the National Guard. This once clear statute, enacted following the Civil War, has been greatly eroded through time by opinions of mainly government lawyers and the courts themselves, in the opinion of many, in any event.

A pretty good explanation of what the act means today, if anything, can be found here:

http://www.homelandsecurity.org/journal ... ilcock.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So much for governing your affairs by reading the clear wording of a law. Ever wonder why there are so many lawyers doing such a great job in the Congress nowadays?

Elmo

When you mention that the National Guard isn't governed by the Posse Comitatus Act, then it might just have been National Guard equipment that was utilized in Waco instead of Regular Army. After all, most of the gear and equipment that the Nat. Guard owns is stored at various military installations such as Ft. Hood, Ft. Bliss, Ft. Sam Houston etc.

Of course, they would have had to get the Governor to mobilize those units.

On a different note, I thought that it began as an ATF operation that quickly went bad and then the FBI was brought in to finish it.

[rdcrags]

I mean how can you learn from the past if you don't know what happened and why?

One of the difficult things for a new generation to do is to learn about the past to avoid making the same or similar mistakes, while at the same time not holding a grudge. Example: our attitude toward Germans and Japanese today, my father’s war.

[The Annoyed Man]

I mean how can you learn from the past if you don't know what happened and why?

One of the difficult things for a new generation to do is to learn about the past to avoid making the same or similar mistakes, while at the same time not holding a grudge. Example: our attitude toward Germans and Japanese today, my father’s war.

My father is one of those who never held a grudge against the Japanese, even after having been wounded by one and killing at least one at Iwo Jima. He had bad memories of the war and seldom talked about it, and he was enough of a student of history and directly involved in the war enough himself to not carry any misgivings about the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; but when the war was over, it was over. I never heard him give voice to bad thoughts about the Japanese as individuals, as a people, or about their fitness for inclusion in humanity.

[PvilleStang]

My father is one of those who never held a grudge against the Japanese, even after having been wounded by one and killing at least one at Iwo Jima. He had bad memories of the war and seldom talked about it, and he was enough of a student of history and directly involved in the war enough himself to not carry any misgivings about the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; but when the war was over, it was over. I never heard him give voice to bad thoughts about the Japanese as individuals, as a people, or about their fitness for inclusion in humanity.

Just curious, did he ever buy a Honda, Toyota, Mitsubishi, Suzuki, or Nissan?

[VMI77]

Shots were fired at FBI personell in a helicopter at Ruby Ridge. The FBI's HRT was called in to both areas because BATF agents drew fire and screwed up their initial contact (Waco and Ruby Ridge).

Weaver and his sons fired at federal personell on the ground. They used their female family members as shields and holed for a fight.

This info is based on first hand stories from HRT guys that were there.

Who, of course, tell the HRT side of the story. How did they explain illegally changing the ROE, and how did they explain the findings at trial? I'm not trying to impugn the reputation of HRT. I'm sure that they are like all other LEOs—for the most part good and honorable men and women who seek to do a difficult job as well as they possibly can. And like I said above, Randy Weaver was a racist pig. But even unsympathetic racist pigs, ironically, have rights, and once in a while you do get rogue cops who take liberty with the truth. It seems to me that Weaver's attorney was able to successfully demonstrate at trial that his client's rights had been violated, and the court found that to be true. Weaver's settlement award entirely depended on the truth or falsehood of those allegations, as proven at trial. So how do your friends at HRT square their version with the findings at trial?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge

The 1993 trial jury accepted the defense theory of the firefight and acquitted Harris on grounds of self-defense. In 1997 Boundary County Sheriff Greg Sprungl conducted an independent search of the "Y" and Lucien Haag confirmed that a bullet found in that search matched Cooper's gun and contained fibers that matched Sammy Weaver's shirt.[39]) [contradicting testimony of the Marshalls]

The Denver FBI SWAT team assigned to Ruby Ridge thought the ROE were "crazy" and agreed among themselves to follow the FBI deadly force policy. However, most of the FBI HRT sniper/observers accepted the ROE as modifying the deadly force policy. Examples: HRT sniper Dale Monroe saw the ROE as a "green light" to shoot armed adult males on sight and HRT sniper Edward Wenger believed that if he observed armed adults, he could use deadly force, but he was to follow standard deadly force policy for all other individuals. Fred Lanceley, the FBI Hostage Negotiator at Ruby Ridge, was "surprised and shocked" at the ROE, the most severe rules he had ever heard in his over 300 hostage situations and characterized the ROE as inconsistent with standard policy.[45] A later Senate report criticized the ROE as "virtual shoot-on-sight orders."[10]

Horiuchi fired a second bullet, which passed through Vicki Weaver's head, killing her, and wounded Harris in the chest. Vicki Weaver was standing behind the door through which Harris was entering the house, holding their 10-month-old baby Elisheba[47] in her arms.[48] The Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility Ruby Ridge Task Force Report (June 10, 1994) stated in section I. Executive Summary subhead B. Significant Findings that the second shot did not satisfy constitutional standards for legal use of deadly force.The OPR review also found the lack of a request to surrender was "inexcusable", since Harris and the two Weavers were running for cover without returning fire and were not an imminent threat. The task force also specifically blamed Horiuchi for firing through the door, not knowing whether someone was on the other side of it. While controversy exists as to who is responsible for approving the ROE that were being followed by the sniper, the task force also condemned the so-called "rules of engagement" allowing shots to be fired with no request for surrender.[46]

Both FBI HQ and the Site Commanders in Idaho re-evaluated the situation based on information they were receiving from US Marshals Hunt, Cooper and Roderick about what had happened on August 21. On about August 24, 1992, the fourth day of the siege on the Weaver family, FBI Deputy Assistant Director Danny Coulson wrote a memo:

OPR 004477
Something to Consider
1. Charge against Weaver is ********. [my edit to remove colorful language]
2. No one saw Weaver do any shooting.
3. Vicki has no charges against her.
4. Weaver's defense. He ran down the hill to see what dog was
barking at. Some guys in camys shot his dog.
Started shooting at him. Killed his son. Harris did the
shooting [of Degan]. He [Weaver] is in pretty strong legal position."[50]

On August 26, 1992, 10:53 a.m., the Rules of Engagement that had been in effect since the arrival of the HRT on August 22 were revoked

Weaver was ultimately acquitted of all charges except missing his original court date and violating his bail conditions, for which he was sentenced to 18 months and fined $10,000. Credited with time served, Weaver spent an additional 4 months in prison. Harris was acquitted of all charges.

Both the internal 1994 Ruby Ridge Task Force Report and the public 1995 Senate subcommittee report on Ruby Ridge criticized the rules of engagement as unconstitutional.

The surviving members of the Weaver family filed a wrongful death suit. To avoid trial and a possibly higher settlement, the federal government awarded Randy Weaver a $100,000 settlement and his three daughters $1 million each in August 1995

But hey, what does a county Sheriff, an FBI Swat team, an FBI Hostage Negotiator, an asst. FBI director, a trial jury, an internal task force, Senate subcommittee, an FBI Director, US government attorneys, and the DOJ know? --and it's not like someone accused of doing something wrong might act in their own self-interest and do something like shade the truth, or anything.

[gigag04]

Shots were fired at FBI personell in a helicopter at Ruby Ridge. The FBI's HRT was called in to both areas because BATF agents drew fire and screwed up their initial contact (Waco and Ruby Ridge).

Weaver and his sons fired at federal personell on the ground. They used their female family members as shields and holed for a fight.

This info is based on first hand stories from HRT guys that were there.

Who, of course, tell the HRT side of the story. How did they explain illegally changing the ROE, and how did they explain the findings at trial? I'm not trying to impugn the reputation of HRT. I'm sure that they are like all other LEOs—for the most part good and honorable men and women who seek to do a difficult job as well as they possibly can. And like I said above, Randy Weaver was a racist pig. But even unsympathetic racist pigs, ironically, have rights, and once in a while you do get rogue cops who take liberty with the truth. It seems to me that Weaver's attorney was able to successfully demonstrate at trial that his client's rights had been violated, and the court found that to be true. Weaver's settlement award entirely depended on the truth or falsehood of those allegations, as proven at trial. So how do your friends at HRT square their version with the findings at trial?

HRT cant change roe for each mission. They come from SAC/ASACs on scene who FBI admin uses to puppet master operations.

[Jumping Frog]

HRT cant change roe for each mission. They come from SAC/ASACs on scene who FBI admin uses to puppet master operations.

Now they can't.

It is common knowledge that they changed it for Ruby Ridge.

[anygunanywhere]

Ruby Ridge and Waco are just a sample of what you can expect in the future.

Anygunanywhere

[Middle Age Russ]

It is a sad think how quick a nation forgets things, I was a history major in college and would be amazed at what my friends didn't know about history, I mean how can you learn from the past if you don't know what happened and why?

A problem I have with some history classes is the idea that it has to have happened a long time ago before you can talk about it, however in a POLS class it could have happened yesterday and we would have been talking about it today. So a lot of people grow up not knowing what happened right before they were born or even what happened during their early years.

So it looks like this did happen during my time but I just didn't know, please forgive as a history buff I try to keep up with things but alas you cant know everything.

History CAN be a wonderful teacher. The unsettling thing is that what passes as the History taught to the current generation is typically what the winner of the conflict (or current regime with their political/social biases) wants them to know/believe. As has been said many times, there are usually three sides to a story -- the winner's, the loser's, and reality. Studying history, really digging in and learning about things from as many perspectives as possible, provides much better lessons from the past that simply learning what the current textbook says.

[srothstein]

To get back to the original question, there is no law in Texas titled wrongful arrest. If an arrest is unlawful, the person making the arrest (either an LEO or a citizen) can be charged with unlawful restraint (PC 20.02) or kidnapping/aggravated kidnapping (PC 20.03/20.04). A peace officer may also be charged with Official Oppression (PC 39.03). There are also possible federal civil rights charges.

A previous poster has already mentioned the Posse Comitatus Act. This is the federal law that prohibits the use of the military to enforce civil laws. The statement that it barred everyone except the Coast Guard was not quite accurate. The law only applies to the Army and the Air Force. Dept. of Defense rules have made the principle applicable tot he Navy and Marine Corps, but the law does not include them. In addition, there are many loopholes in it now, such as when enforcing drug laws, anti-terror laws, and border patrol, among other things. You may remember the experiment with active duty marines on border patrol that shot Ezekiel Hernandez (IIRC) while he was herding his family's animals (he was armed and there is dispute over his pointing a rifle at the Marines).

The National Guard is a tricky case for this law. They cannot be used if they are activated by federal order, unless it falls into one of the legal exceptions. But, the state may use them for almost any purpose by having the governor activate them and the state pay the bill.

There is also some legal questions over whether or not the law forbids active participation only or includes training, support, and advising or similar activities.

Historically, the law was passed in 1878 and was a response to both the abuses of reconstruction and the abuses of using the military in the territories that were not yet states.