Fountain of Knowledge

Summer... who's she again? ,

By any chance, are Bob and Alan in California?

I used to work with a local school district. Our department shared office space with the school district Police Department, three full time officers and a cadre of part-timers who worked full time for LAPD and other local PDs.

Our sergeant explained citizen’s arrests to me. Basically, once you put someone under citizens arrest it is your duty to turn him over to a law enforcement as soon as possible. It is his duty to go with you or stay with you should you call the police. If the arrestee does not comply, it is your right to escalate force. up to and including lethal, to maintain the arrest. If he punches, use a knife, if he pulls a knife, pull a gun and so on. A policeman’s power to arrest is a modification of a citizen’s arrest. Since they are law enforcement, they must take the suspect to a detention authority as quick as possible. No detours to the coffee shop, or trip home to kiss the wife. Even drive through coffee at McDonalds would lead to the suspects case being “kicked” for unlawful arrest. In this case, being “kicked” is a good thing.

In your case, Bob already shot Allan. They are already on top of a steep escalation curve. If Allan claims he tried to put Bob under citizen’s arrest, the shots in the back are not a problem. Even if a police officer yells, ”Stop or I’ll shoot,” they rarely do. They are expected to evaluate the situation and weigh the police forces ability to track down the suspect versus various risks of putting lead in the air. When bullets miss their target, they don’t just drop to the ground. They continue on with potentially tragic consequences. Pistol fire is not very accurate past fifty feet, especially when the shooter is running or fatigued. Police officers know all this and are reluctant to let rounds loose if they can avoid it. Citizens are not presumed to have this training or knowledge and their actions are protected, somewhat, by a variety of laws.

So far, Alan is walking a thin line, but he still might have the upper hand. Forensically, he’s screwed. There is no doubt he fired the gun, GSR, and his bullets felled Bob. If he can claim he was in the act of enforcing a citizen’s arrest, he’s clear.

Then Alan put the capper in Bob’s forehead. That’s murder, plain and simple. Alan’s potential fate depends on other facts. First off, blood drops will determine who got shot where and, for the most part, in what sequence. I am not sure if blood splatter evidence and body position can determine if Bob bit it in a defenseless state or if Alan can still claim self defense. Witness testimony will probably cinch it. Lack of witnesses gives Alan options.

Depending how you write it, it could all come down to character. Alan knows he committed murder. Will he allow his attorney to pursue citizen’s arrest/self defense, claim justifiable homicide (a loosing case in my eyes) or jury nullification (A legal strategy where lawyers attempt to sway the jury from the law and rule in their favor as seen many times on Boston Legal).

Stix.