• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Vancouver OC Arrest

Jeff Hayes

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
2,569
Location
Long gone
I keep asking myself why would he leave his car if he had been trespassed from the property. If you are trespassed take your stuff and leave simple as that.
 

jfslicer

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2013
Messages
72
Location
Lake Stevens
I keep asking myself why would he leave his car if he had been trespassed from the property. If you are trespassed take your stuff and leave simple as that.

My understanding from watching his interview was that there was no threat of a trespass until the police showed up, took his gun, frisked him, ran his gun, and told him he could go. At which point he was already separated from his vehicle. He was trying to return to his car and they threatened to trespass him if he continued moving in that direction, so he changed direction (90 degrees) and they made the same threat, so he did a 180 and got arrested.
 

tombrewster421

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
1,326
Location
Roy, WA
It would be very helpful to see the recording he made to know whether or not he was actually asked to leave any of these places. But since that is in police custody the chances of that are slim to none. Especially if it proves he was not asked to leave.

Part of me thinks he left out some details and another part thinks the business owners did the chicken thing and just called the cops to trespass him without talking to him first. That's what happened to me once. The owner of the antique sandwich company in Tacoma had the police do all the talking for him cause he was too chicken. I was not trespassed though only asked to cover up.
 

()pen(arry

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
735
Location
Seattle, WA; escaped from 18 years in TX
I presume a private individual committed no offense whatsoever until there's any credible evidence whatsoever against him. So far, there is exactly zero. Cops never, ever get the benefit of the doubt, because they are government actors.
 

Jeff Hayes

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
2,569
Location
Long gone
My understanding from watching his interview was that there was no threat of a trespass until the police showed up, took his gun, frisked him, ran his gun, and told him he could go. At which point he was already separated from his vehicle. He was trying to return to his car and they threatened to trespass him if he continued moving in that direction, so he changed direction (90 degrees) and they made the same threat, so he did a 180 and got arrested.

Something is missing from this story or this guy is not too bright or a bit of both. Been there played that game with the Cops and all you have to do is simply go to the nearest public sidewalk, street etc as long as you are attempting to leave the charges will not stick. I can tell you from experience that will not always keep you from being arrested but it will get the charges dropped, worked for me.
 

ccwinstructor

Centurion
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
919
Location
Yuma, Arizona, USA
He says he was recording the incident and the police impounded his phone as evidence

it seem one of the issue are he tried to get back to his car, on property that had ran him off. wonder why he didn't mention that in his video. maybe it didn't happen.

i would like to see follow up to this

Hard to believe that he would lie about something that he recorded. He makes numerous statements about illegal police activity. He says they asked him to stop recording and he refused. When they arrested him, he says the female officer took his phone and was manipulating it.

His story sounds credible to me. I hope that they contact witnesses to back up what they saw the police do. Maybe there is more video out there.

The seventh Circuit has upheld that recording police in the performance of their public duties is a First Amendment Right.

http://www.videomaker.com/videonews...endment-rights-new-ruling-on-recording-police
 
Last edited:

rapgood

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
598
Location
Stanwood, WA
Hard to believe that he would lie about something that he recorded. He makes numerous statements about illegal police activity. He says they asked him to stop recording and he refused. When they arrested him, he says the female officer took his phone and was manipulating it.

His story sounds credible to me. I hope that they contact witnesses to back up what they saw the police do. Maybe there is more video out there.

The seventh Circuit has upheld that recording police in the performance of their public duties is a First Amendment Right.

http://www.videomaker.com/videonews...endment-rights-new-ruling-on-recording-police

In Sharp v. Baltimore, the U.S. Dept. of Justice weighed in on the question stating that, in the government's opinion, video recording LEOs in the performance of their duties is a First Amendment right.

Here in Washington, in State v. Flora, Div. I of the state Court of Appeals ruled similarly.
 

ccwinstructor

Centurion
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
919
Location
Yuma, Arizona, USA
Thank you, good to know

In Sharp v. Baltimore, the U.S. Dept. of Justice weighed in on the question stating that, in the government's opinion, video recording LEOs in the performance of their duties is a First Amendment right.

Here in Washington, in State v. Flora, Div. I of the state Court of Appeals ruled similarly.

If it could be shown that an LEO erased a recording of police activity, such as is alleged to have been recorded in this case, would it be reasonable to sue then for rights violations, destruction of property, or spoilation of evidence? I realize that anyone can be sued for nearly anything, but this seems especially clear cut... if it can be shown that a recording was destroyed.
 

911Boss

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
753
Location
Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
Sounds like this whole thing maybe hinges on him re-entering property he was ejected from, just to get his car which was parked on said property. I'm not aware of any "I just need to get my car" exemptions to our state's trespass laws.

My heart is with this guy, but I think we need to keep all possibilities in mind here . . .

I think this is the the part that may be getting overlooked. I watched both videos, and it sounds to me that he was stopped, searched, trespassed, and released but then after trying two different approaches to return to his car (and either reentering or showing the intent to reenter the property he was trespassed from) was stopped again and arrested for the trespass.

If that is the case, he may have a hard time defending it. After you show up the cops and they grudgingly let you go, don't expect them to exercise much compassion or latitude for a technical violation. As Dean says, there is no "I need to get my stuff" exception. If given the opportunity to walk away, walk away and have someone come and get your car later.

I would not have even drawn attention to my car as once trespassed, if it is left on the property one might expect the prerty owner to then have it privately impounded as an unauthorized veh on private property.
 

AZRobert

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Messages
28
Location
Portland, OR
I think this is the the part that may be getting overlooked. I watched both videos, and it sounds to me that he was stopped, searched, trespassed, and released but then after trying two different approaches to return to his car (and either reentering or showing the intent to reenter the property he was trespassed from) was stopped again and arrested for the trespass.

If that is the case, he may have a hard time defending it. After you show up the cops and they grudgingly let you go, don't expect them to exercise much compassion or latitude for a technical violation. As Dean says, there is no "I need to get my stuff" exception. If given the opportunity to walk away, walk away and have someone come and get your car later.

I would not have even drawn attention to my car as once trespassed, if it is left on the property one might expect the prerty owner to then have it privately impounded as an unauthorized veh on private property.

A couple of questions and comments from me..

Is a parking lot in a strip mall/shopping center public or private property? Obviously the interior of the store itself is but does the parking lot count?

I personally feel the reasonable person standard is a completely subjective test (I'll check with my lady tonight she's a lawyer and probably has much more insight than I do into that) however what is reasonable and acceptable for one person is not the same for another. It can also change for a person over time, I am a prime example of this.

If you are going to engaging in casual strolling while carrying a rifle I strongly suggest you use the buddy system. Currently I'm in AZ (I'll be relocating to NW Portland in 2 weeks) and I notice I get much fewer stink eyes from people when I have my kids or my girl friend with me than I do while I am alone. Note: I only carry a pistol not a rifle.

Also while I understand the activist stand point of going for a stroll while carrying your rifle it seems to me that the people engaging in solo activity like this where they are proudly displaying their weapon are much more likely to have police encounters. I've never done this sort of thing, I carry my gun daily outside of work for my normal errands and in my apartment complex(I put it on as soon as I get home) I get questions which I happily answer but never have I been stopped or approached by any LEO.
 

AZRobert

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Messages
28
Location
Portland, OR
So I checked with the lady and every person is assumed to know what the law is.

Therefor I would say a reasonable person knowing the law would not be alarmed to see someone doing something that is not illegal.
 

PMB

New member
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
1
Location
Vancouver

Well, this is strange. I mean I am GLAD that this is the standard, but it seems to me that NO reasonable citizen could be alarmed by an open carry in the State of Washington.

And yet not only are uninformed citizens alarmed, LE are also.

How then can these cases be prosecuted?
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Well, this is strange. I mean I am GLAD that this is the standard, but it seems to me that NO reasonable citizen could be alarmed by an open carry in the State of Washington.

And yet not only are uninformed citizens alarmed, LE are also.

How then can these cases be prosecuted?

By cops and prosecutors and judges who ignore the law. Sadly it works.
 

Tackleberry1

Regular Member
Joined
May 10, 2013
Messages
86
Location
Camas

I had the pleasure of meeting Mack today and found him to be a polite, intelligent, young man who I am inclined to believe...

...especially since VPD has video evidence of the entire encounter in their possession... yet they are not giving it up?

Cops only hide evidence when Cops have something to hide... and I've seen enough in my 11 years as a resident of "Vantucky"... to find VPD's story more than a bit suspects.

I would highly encourage everyone to click the link and donate what you can. We must ensure Mack has the resources the fight this for his sake... and ours.

Tack
 
Top