The wrong way to do a citizens arrest [Georgia]

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Oldgunfan

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 6, 2018
    83
    8
    GPS signal lost
    I looked around and didn't see this news on the forums yet. I'm posting it hear because I'm more interested in the self-defense aspects of this than the politics. (Though I expect in less than 24 hrs it will be all politics...)
    I'm still young in forum-years, so be gentle :)

    Quite a disturbing video....
    https://www.foxnews.com/us/georgia-grand-jury-review-recommended-in-fatal-shooting-of-ahmaud-arbery


    Here's my understanding of the visible facts from the video:
    - a black man is running/jogging down a street, on the left hand side
    - there is a white truck in the right lane, with a man standing in the bed of the truck and another man standing next to the driver-side door, with the door open behind him
    - as the runner nears the truck, he cuts across the road to the right hand side, then the video swings out of frame for a brief moment
    - when the video re-centers, the runner is passing to the front of the truck and the driver has moved around the driver-side door to the front of the truck
    - the first gunshot is heard while the view of the driver and the runner is obstructed in the front of the truck
    - the driver and the runner then are struggling for control of shotgun(?) as they move to the left side of the road
    - two more gunshots are heard during the struggle (I can't if they were all from the shotgun)
    - struggle ends, runner stumbles and dies

    From the article, my understanding is the truck guys suspected that the runner was responsible for a string of burglaries and were attempting to make a citizen's arrest. Of course, this got me to look up the laws in Georgia governing citizens arrest. Here they are:

    "O.C.G.A. 17-4-60 (2010)
    17-4-60. Grounds for arrest
    A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion."

    I'm not a lawyer, nor familiar with Georgia law, but from the way I read this a citizens arrest is only legal in Georgia if a) the criminal is caught in the act or b) the criminal is caught attempting to flee. It doesn't appear to address the use of force in such an arrest.

    Now to my opinion: I think the truck guys got it wrong. Even if they in fact had correctly identified the criminal, they didn't a) catch him in the act of burglary, nor b) did they catch him attempting to escape following a felony, so I don't think under Georgia law they have grounds for a citizens arrest. Further--and perhaps more importantly--I believe that their use of force was unlawful. Even if they only fired the first shot after the struggle for the firearm put them in a situation where they had a reasonable expectation of danger to themselves, the fact that the driver moved around to the front of the car to confront the runner, while the runner obviously went around the right side to avoid the driver I think would negate any claim to self defense on the driver's part.

    This got me to look up the Indiana law's for a citizen's arrest and I found this nice article that explains it.
    So in Indiana, the laws are a lot more detailed regarding citizens arrest--including addressing the use of force--and I would highly recommend everyone be familiar with them. To be short, if this incident occurred in Indiana, the citizen's arrest may have been legal, but I still don't think the use of force would have been justified.
     

    fullmetaljesus

    Probably smoking a cigar.
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    5,849
    149
    Indy
    Why was someone filming? Were they part of the ambush?

    I suspect these guys will get a hefty prison sentence.
    With a little luck they will get life.
     

    Notropis

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 22, 2018
    98
    8
    NWI
    So many questions here.
    Silly to talk much about it because we have next to no answers.
    I'm always skeptical of the media and one question is easily answered.
    The dead guy is just a jogger. If so, he either lives in the neighborhood or within a close distance.
    If yes, bubbas in the truck have some splaining to do. If not, we are already being spun. Now I believe people should be able to jog in any ole neighborhood but safety varies by neighborhood.
    I do know one thing for sure - If I have a shotgun pointed at me (for right or for wrong) I have mere seconds to dominate that weapon or I need to comply. Guy in the back of the truck makes for low odds on domination and once I engage in an attempt to disarm, I have now given the shotgun wielder THE reason to shoot me. Half hearty attempt to disarm in this case was a really bad decision.
     

    Sigblitz

    Grandmaster
    Trainer Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Aug 25, 2018
    14,583
    113
    Indianapolis
    What I saw, he tries to run around the left side of the truck and is confronted with a rifle. He goes around the right side and is confronted with a rifle. He gets in a struggle with the man aiming the rifle at him. The man in the truck bed shoots him.

    It would have been a good shoot if the guy in the truck bed shot the man with the rifle, although not necessary because the victim would have gotten the upper hand.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113
    So in Indiana, the laws are a lot more detailed regarding citizens arrest--including addressing the use of force--and I would highly recommend everyone be familiar with them. To be short, if this incident occurred in Indiana, the citizen's arrest may have been legal, but I still don't think the use of force would have been justified.

    Going strictly on the media account from the linked article, it would not be. An arrest requires probable cause, no matter who is doing the arresting.

    Matching the description alone isn't probable cause, it's reasonable suspicion at best.

    Law enforcement can detain on reasonable suspicion, but there is no "Citizen's Detain" equivalent. In real world terms, police can stop you to further the investigation and can then make an arrest or release you. Non-police need to be able to make an arrest based on what they know right then with no further investigation. You can't arrest based solely on "in the area and matched the description".
     

    DadSmith

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 21, 2018
    22,177
    113
    Ripley County
    Why were they engaging him just follow call 911 let a real officer come check it out. If the jury finds them guilty so be it. That was foolish of them.
     

    long coat

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Jun 6, 2010
    1,603
    48
    Avon
    Some of the news I have seen about this
    The man that was killed "was seen inside a house under construction" just before the 2 men seen him run by their house.
    The 2 men are father and son, 1 of them ( I think it was the father) WAS an investigator for the local DA. They didn't call him a LEO, so I'm not sure what his job was.

    This was info in the news, so take it with a very large grain of salt.
     

    Expat

    Pdub
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    23   0   0
    Feb 27, 2010
    108,724
    113
    Michiana
    So if there are a couple burglaries in the area, you can't start rounding up and shooting random black guys? Who knew...
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    So if there are a couple burglaries in the area, you can't start rounding up and shooting random black guys? Who knew...

    Apparently, the only "burglary" that had occurred in that neighborhood between January 1, 2020 and this shooting in February was the theft of the son's M&P 9 pistol from his vehicle.

    These guys wanted blood, period.

    "Only one burglary, an automobile burglary, was reported to county police in the Satilla Shores neighborhood between Jan. 1 and Feb. 23, according to documents obtained by The News in a public records request to the Glynn County Police Department. It involved a Smith & Wesson M&P 9 mm pistol stolen Jan. 1 from a pickup truck outside 230 Satilla Drive, the home of Travis McMichael, according to the police report."

    https://thebrunswicknews.com/news/l...cle_fe51cdd4-3bb6-5815-9dec-ddcdc8f879f8.html
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113
    Apparently, the only "burglary" that had occurred in that neighborhood between January 1, 2020 and this shooting in February was the theft of the son's M&P 9 pistol from his vehicle.

    These guys wanted blood, period.

    "Only one burglary, an automobile burglary, was reported to county police in the Satilla Shores neighborhood between Jan. 1 and Feb. 23, according to documents obtained by The News in a public records request to the Glynn County Police Department. It involved a Smith & Wesson M&P 9 mm pistol stolen Jan. 1 from a pickup truck outside 230 Satilla Drive, the home of Travis McMichael, according to the police report."

    https://thebrunswicknews.com/news/l...cle_fe51cdd4-3bb6-5815-9dec-ddcdc8f879f8.html

    Interesting find. Looks like trespass AT BEST even if we take the first caller's word as gospel. Not burglary.

    Another victory for "truck guns" as well.
     

    Oldgunfan

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 6, 2018
    83
    8
    GPS signal lost
    Going strictly on the media account from the linked article, it would not be. An arrest requires probable cause, no matter who is doing the arresting.

    Matching the description alone isn't probable cause, it's reasonable suspicion at best.

    Law enforcement can detain on reasonable suspicion, but there is no "Citizen's Detain" equivalent. In real world terms, police can stop you to further the investigation and can then make an arrest or release you. Non-police need to be able to make an arrest based on what they know right then with no further investigation. You can't arrest based solely on "in the area and matched the description".

    Thanks for this explainer on the difference between probable cause and reasonable suspicion. Good point!
     
    Last edited:
    Top Bottom