Ny man arrested for corralling kids who ransacked his house

[PratchettFan]

[
Ever heard of the Castle Doctrine? Several states have decided you can defend the interior of your home with any force necessary. He could in fact, have beaten the little savages to death and claimed Castle Doctrine. There is a clear line between "threatening" and assault without battery. His word against theirs what he did and did not do....like raising the hammer in a threatening manner....he can claim all he did was look down at his hammer and look at the kids...everybody knows what that means, but it is NOT menacing or assault without battery. Also, sovereign immunity applies to the state, but NOT a city within the state. A little legal knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Yes. I've heard of the Castle Doctrine. Have you bothered to read any of those laws? He could gave beaten them to death, and he would have been arrested and most certainly convicted of murder. Even in the state with the most liberal Castle Doctrine law, he would have been convicted of murder.

Please don't attempt to impress me with your legal expertise. I am not impressed and you are wrong. "Everybody know"... good grief.

and yet you put things i did not say into my post? ie. beer? where did i mention beer? i did not. So why dont you shut the fuck up and read the link?

Again, I apologize for the beer comment. When I am bsing with my buddies (that's how you phrased it) I normally do that with a beer. I projected my behavior to you. Sorry.

 

[PratchettFan]

That is debatable if he threatened them! He seeked to detain them until the police arrived. This is a rural community, so it could have taken a long time.

By detaining them in the closet he adverted the chases of anyone being harmed. The kids might have tried to flee and he might have had to tackle them.

I see nothing wrong with what he had done. Look at the damage to the house. These kids need to be punished hard and get a good dosage of reality. That much heartless, cruel and destructive behavior at such a young age will not slow down when they are adults. Just a lack of morals now, will be disasterous later!

According to the story, he threatened them. I'm not saying the kids don't need to be punished or that the parents aren't fully responsible for all of the damage. The question was asked, what the man should have done instead. What he should have done was not threaten the kids with a hammer.

if he hadn't used some sort of threat I am sure they would have all fled. I would think it was his way of getting them to listen to him without doing any actual harm. And it was the kids that actually had the hammers at first.

Fled to where? He knew the kids and knew where they lived. The cops walked them home - according to the story. What he did was a serious mistake. The difference between a young child and an adult is that the child is not expected to act like an adult.

Seriously people, if you think anyone is going to convince me that a full grown man was actually threatened by four 8 - 10 year olds you are wasting your time. That dog not only won't hunt, it is sound asleep under the porch.

 

[WillowTree]

The man should file a civil suit after he gets out of jail. File it against the parents and get them to rebuild the house their little piggies destroyed.

 

[PratchettFan]

Clyde man arrested after corralling vandals in a closet until police arrived - The Times of Wayne County


What should he have done instead?

Call the police and seek restitution from the parents. What he shouldn't have done is threaten children with a hammer.

How do you detain and identify four kids with hammers without threatening them?

Since you don't seem to have read it.

The kids had the hammers, they broke into the father in law house of this guy named Daniels. The kids evidently did about 40-50k worth of damage. They broke windows, walls, cabinets, counters, sinks, everything, threw paint around, wrote curse words, completely trashed the insides of a nice house. According to Daniels the kids said it was in retaliation for someone telling the kids to get off the property earlier in the day. Allegedly the kids mom told the kids to trash the place in retaliation. When caught, the kids tried to run and Daniels corralled them into the closet.

Then two days later Daniels gets arrested for threatening the vandals? And you are good with that? The parent of two of the kids that wants the police to throw the book at Daniels is a real POS.

Sick how far people will go to support criminals destroying this country.

He was arrested for threatening children with a deadly weapon. Apparently you are ok with that. Interesting.

 

[PratchettFan]

The man should file a civil suit after he gets out of jail. File it against the parents and get them to rebuild the house their little piggies destroyed.

Absolutely.

 

[Jarlaxle]

This is one of life's problems that might be best solved with a shotgun and a Bobcat...

 

[strollingbones]

Yes. I've heard of the Castle Doctrine. Have you bothered to read any of those laws? He could gave beaten them to death, and he would have been arrested and most certainly convicted of murder. Even in the state with the most liberal Castle Doctrine law, he would have been convicted of murder.

Please don't attempt to impress me with your legal expertise. I am not impressed and you are wrong. "Everybody know"... good grief.

and yet you put things i did not say into my post? ie. beer? where did i mention beer? i did not. So why dont you shut the fuck up and read the link?

Again, I apologize for the beer comment. When I am bsing with my buddies (that's how you phrased it) I normally do that with a beer. I projected my behavior to you. Sorry.

no worries...i will get over it....


i had a problem where a man was on my property and refused to id himself....to make a long story short...when the police arrived...the policeman told me i could have shot him...simple as that...he ask why i didnt... the reason? i had left the house in a fit of anger in my housecoat without a gun

 

[PratchettFan]

This is one of life's problems that might be best solved with a shotgun and a Bobcat...

So you are suggesting the best approach would be the cold blooded murder of young children.

 

[Nate]

What 8-10 year old kids do this!?! Teenagers, adults, or a pissed off boyfriend/girlfriend I can see but these little ones? I mean I can't even imagine a 9 year old knowing what a **** is let alone know how to spell it... Regardless of the outcome in court, social service should definitely be involved!

 

[PratchettFan]

and yet you put things i did not say into my post? ie. beer? where did i mention beer? i did not. So why dont you shut the fuck up and read the link?

Again, I apologize for the beer comment. When I am bsing with my buddies (that's how you phrased it) I normally do that with a beer. I projected my behavior to you. Sorry.

no worries...i will get over it....


i had a problem where a man was on my property and refused to id himself....to make a long story short...when the police arrived...the policeman told me i could have shot him...simple as that...he ask why i didnt... the reason? i had left the house in a fit of anger in my housecoat without a gun

I think the policeman gave you some very bad advice. Personally, unless I am going somewhere it is not allowed I am typically armed whenever I go outside my house. So far, I have never needed it but it makes me feel better carrying it. Still, I understand that if I do pull my weapon I had better have a very good reason for doing so. Simply because someone won't get off my land is not a good enough reason. If the man comes at me in a threatening way, he is dead. I'm too old to even consider a fair fight. But just refusing to leave means I am calling the police and let them deal with it.

Despite what the cop told you, he has no control over it. If there is a dead body then the machine starts to move and it will eat you as a matter of course. The cop who shows up does not control that unless he helps you hide the body.

 

[Jarlaxle]

This is one of life's problems that might be best solved with a shotgun and a Bobcat...

So you are suggesting the best approach would be the cold blooded murder of young children.

No, I am suggesting that the gene pool would be cleansed were the four little thugs to cease polluting it.

 

[Katzndogz]

Call the police and seek restitution from the parents. What he shouldn't have done is threaten children with a hammer.

How do you detain and identify four kids with hammers without threatening them?

Since you don't seem to have read it.

The kids had the hammers, they broke into the father in law house of this guy named Daniels. The kids evidently did about 40-50k worth of damage. They broke windows, walls, cabinets, counters, sinks, everything, threw paint around, wrote curse words, completely trashed the insides of a nice house. According to Daniels the kids said it was in retaliation for someone telling the kids to get off the property earlier in the day. Allegedly the kids mom told the kids to trash the place in retaliation. When caught, the kids tried to run and Daniels corralled them into the closet.

Then two days later Daniels gets arrested for threatening the vandals? And you are good with that? The parent of two of the kids that wants the police to throw the book at Daniels is a real POS.

Sick how far people will go to support criminals destroying this country.

He was arrested for threatening children with a deadly weapon. Apparently you are ok with that. Interesting.

I'm okay with that. These children have never had any discipline in their lives. That's how they got the way they are.

 

[PratchettFan]

This is one of life's problems that might be best solved with a shotgun and a Bobcat...

So you are suggesting the best approach would be the cold blooded murder of young children.

No, I am suggesting that the gene pool would be cleansed were the four little thugs to cease polluting it.

I know what you are suggesting. Have a nice life.

 

[JoeBlam]

=PratchettFan;7391739]I doubt it. False arrest doesn't apply here since the man did break the law. Plus, you have to demonstrate gross negligence to get past sovereign immunity - which has no chance in this case. The plea deal will only irritate the man's attorney because it will reduce his fee - not because it won't be in the man's best interests. He should not have threatened children with a hammer. That was a mistake.

[
Ever heard of the Castle Doctrine? Several states have decided you can defend the interior of your home with any force necessary. He could in fact, have beaten the little savages to death and claimed Castle Doctrine. There is a clear line between "threatening" and assault without battery. His word against theirs what he did and did not do....like raising the hammer in a threatening manner....he can claim all he did was look down at his hammer and look at the kids...everybody knows what that means, but it is NOT menacing or assault without battery. Also, sovereign immunity applies to the state, but NOT a city within the state. A little legal knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Yes. I've heard of the Castle Doctrine. Have you bothered to read any of those laws? He could gave beaten them to death, and he would have been arrested and most certainly convicted of murder. Even in the state with the most liberal Castle Doctrine law, he would have been convicted of murder.

Please don't attempt to impress me with your legal expertise. I am not impressed and you are wrong. "Everybody know"... good grief.

I'm not the one posing as an attorney, MORON....that would be you and if you are a lawyer little wonder this is the only place you'd be allowed to "practice".

 

[Anitabeme]

I hope the guy sues the hell out of the parents. They're lucky they aren't my kids...being locked in a closet would be the least of their worries.

 

[PratchettFan]

[
Ever heard of the Castle Doctrine? Several states have decided you can defend the interior of your home with any force necessary. He could in fact, have beaten the little savages to death and claimed Castle Doctrine. There is a clear line between "threatening" and assault without battery. His word against theirs what he did and did not do....like raising the hammer in a threatening manner....he can claim all he did was look down at his hammer and look at the kids...everybody knows what that means, but it is NOT menacing or assault without battery. Also, sovereign immunity applies to the state, but NOT a city within the state. A little legal knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Yes. I've heard of the Castle Doctrine. Have you bothered to read any of those laws? He could gave beaten them to death, and he would have been arrested and most certainly convicted of murder. Even in the state with the most liberal Castle Doctrine law, he would have been convicted of murder.

Please don't attempt to impress me with your legal expertise. I am not impressed and you are wrong. "Everybody know"... good grief.

I'm not the one posing as an attorney, MORON....that would be you and if you are a lawyer little wonder this is the only place you'd be allowed to "practice".

Uh huh. Another thing everybody knows, is it?

 

[JoeBlam]

Uh huh. Another thing everybody knows, is it?

Yep. My background is no doubt different than yours....I grew up on the streets of Detroit and was taught by the older italian guys how things work. Often times, what goes unsaid leaves the clearest message. So when I got you against a wall with a hammer in my hand, I don't have to raise it and shake it at ya....that's menacing, assault without battery. But if I look at you for a lingering moment, then slowly glance down at the hammer at my side, then slowly return my gaze to you, eyes narrowed and curling my lip a little, EVERYBODY knows what's coming if they ain't doing what I told them to do....even YOU, Perry.....even you.

 

[Unkotare]

Uh huh. Another thing everybody knows, is it?

Yep. My background is no doubt different than yours....I grew up on the streets of Detroit and was taught by the older italian guys how things work. Often times, what goes unsaid leaves the clearest message. So when I got you against a wall with a hammer in my hand, I don't have to raise it and shake it at ya....that's menacing, assault without battery. But if I look at you for a lingering moment, then slowly glance down at the hammer at my side, then slowly return my gaze to you, eyes narrowed and curling my lip a little, EVERYBODY knows what's coming if they ain't doing what I told them to do....even YOU, Perry.....even you.

 

[PratchettFan]

Uh huh. Another thing everybody knows, is it?

Yep. My background is no doubt different than yours....I grew up on the streets of Detroit and was taught by the older italian guys how things work. Often times, what goes unsaid leaves the clearest message. So when I got you against a wall with a hammer in my hand, I don't have to raise it and shake it at ya....that's menacing, assault without battery. But if I look at you for a lingering moment, then slowly glance down at the hammer at my side, then slowly return my gaze to you, eyes narrowed and curling my lip a little, EVERYBODY knows what's coming if they ain't doing what I told them to do....even YOU, Perry.....even you.

Well.... older italian guys from Detroit. Who can argue with that kind of expertise.

 

[strollingbones]

Again, I apologize for the beer comment. When I am bsing with my buddies (that's how you phrased it) I normally do that with a beer. I projected my behavior to you. Sorry.

no worries...i will get over it....


i had a problem where a man was on my property and refused to id himself....to make a long story short...when the police arrived...the policeman told me i could have shot him...simple as that...he ask why i didnt... the reason? i had left the house in a fit of anger in my housecoat without a gun

I think the policeman gave you some very bad advice. Personally, unless I am going somewhere it is not allowed I am typically armed whenever I go outside my house. So far, I have never needed it but it makes me feel better carrying it. Still, I understand that if I do pull my weapon I had better have a very good reason for doing so. Simply because someone won't get off my land is not a good enough reason. If the man comes at me in a threatening way, he is dead. I'm too old to even consider a fair fight. But just refusing to leave means I am calling the police and let them deal with it.

Despite what the cop told you, he has no control over it. If there is a dead body then the machine starts to move and it will eat you as a matter of course. The cop who shows up does not control that unless he helps you hide the body.

i live in a small rural area...i am an older (middle age if i plan to live to 120) woman, i have no police record nor any troubles with the law...he gave me the advice he would give any woman alone at home...why take a chance? some stranger is on my property refusing to id himself? all i ask for was id...all i got was slamming of car trunk and a smart ass reply...o i assure you ..he complained to the police about my blocking the road etc..and making him hand over his id and then telling him he could get his id back from the police...at that point...police looked at me and ask...ms. bones would you like to have this man arrested for trespassing?

i live in an area where you just dont screw around with people...simple as that...they call it the frontier or mountain mentality