From 18 U.S.C. §§ 1201: Kidnapping
(a)Whoever unlawfully seizes, confines, inveigles, decoys, kidnaps, abducts, or carries away and holds for ransom or reward or otherwise any person, except in the case of a minor by the parent thereof –
We have a general understanding of the definition of kidnapping.
That word has now entered the newspeak dictionary to mean “law enforcement effecting the legal arrest of a suspect in a way that minimizes the danger to the officers.”
This is the headline from the New York Post:
Teen protester busted by NYPD, charged with criminal mischief
The teen was wanted for damaging police cameras around City Hall Park on June 30, the NYPD said.
She was arrested as she walked with a group through Kips Bay a little before 6 p.m., tailed by a contingent of marked NYPD vehicles and uniformed cops.
She was later charged with criminal mischief for writing on the cameras at City Hall Park, sources said.
She was also hit with several counts of graffiti and criminal mischief as well as other charges in four separate incidents between June 19 and July 6, including for allegedly scribbling inside The Oculus and on an F-train at 63rd Street and Lexington Avenue and for writing on an Upper East Side building and a Park Avenue sidewalk.
The teen was arrested by the NYPD Warrant Squad, which means there was a warrant issued for her arrest.
This is the video of that arrest.
Social media soon exploded with people calling it “kidnapping.”
This is the same accusation leveled against the arrest of agitators in Portland by federal LEOs.
There is a reason the police, both federal and local, have taken to this tactic.
It works and it’s safer for officers.
I’ve posted these Tweets before but I want to discuss them again.
During this detainment, another woman got involved and she was also detained.
“I’m a nice young woman from Wisconsin … you guys are fucking pieces of shit!” she yelled after being taken down by officers. pic.twitter.com/Bs6PNk6kzJ
— Shelby Talcott (@ShelbyTalcott) July 27, 2020
A rotated version of the clip from earlier of protesters dearresting a comrade that a fed went after. pic.twitter.com/IWpDJZHeVj
— Cory Elia (@TheRealCoryElia) July 21, 2020
This is what happens when uniformed officers try to arrest a suspect in the middle of a crowd. Other people rush in and hinder the arrest. The zaftig protesters from Wisconsin got arrested for laying hands on an officer arresting another suspect.
In the latter video, other people outnumber the officer and stop the arrest from happening. They call that “dearresting.”
Remember last year there was the problem where uniformed NYPD officers had crowds surround them and throw water bottles and dump buckets of water on them when they were trying to do their duties.
So the warrant squad, like federal LEOs, use unmarked vehicles to get close to suspects without alerting a crowd to their presence. Then they can nab and arrest the suspect and be out of there before an unruly mob forms to outnumber and “dearrest” the suspect.
However, police said this squad uses unmarked vehicles to find wanted suspects.
Intelligence and counter terrorism expert Brian Boyd said he thinks it was an acceptable police tactic.
“It’s legitimate. When they went up and made the arrest, they identified themselves as police officers,” he said. “A warrant squad is there to find and catch criminals or people who are wanted for committing crimes. And the only way you can do it sometimes, in a large group like that, is to do it undercover.”
Boyd added, “They have to be read their Miranda rights ’cause that’s the requirements. They’re put into a vehicle. The police car was unmarked because it’s safer for the person involved, it’s safer for the police.”
The response on Twitter proves exactly why the police need this tactic.
If I ever witness or see this happening I WILL NOT STAND AROUND AND JUST WATCH IT HAPPEN…I AM GONNA ATTACK THEM AND HELP THIS PERSON..I WILL NEVER LET SOMEONE BE TAKEN AWAY LIKE THAT ..NO MATTER THE COST OR CONSEQUENCES FIGHT BACK HELP THEM STOP THIS ACT..
— KeepitReal (@ddephron) July 29, 2020
When unidentified men are kidnapping someone who is screaming help into an unmarked car, something has gone horribly wrong. I suspect it is only a matter of time before a crowd rushes those men to free the victim.
— adam hackney (@mindmeld_me) July 28, 2020
As it was, those officers were attacked for doing their job.
In regard to a video on social media that took place at 2 Ave & 25 St, a woman taken into custody in an unmarked van was wanted for damaging police cameras during 5 separate criminal incidents in & around City Hall Park. The arresting officers were assaulted with rocks & bottles. pic.twitter.com/2jGD3DT3eV
— NYPD NEWS (@NYPDnews) July 29, 2020
In his unending desire to undermine the NYPD, Mayor Bill de Blasio said:
“A lot of us have been watching in pain what’s going on in Portland, Oregon,” he said. “Anything that even slightly suggests that is, to me, troubling, and it’s the kind of thing we don’t want to see in this city.
“I think it was the wrong time and the wrong place to effectuate that arrest,” he added.
I suspect that next will come a ban on this type of tactic.
That will only put police at more risk when trying to arrest suspects, perhaps to the point where they can’t execute a warrant.
The police should not have to walk a gauntlet of assault to make an arrest.
That is why the Left has rebranded this “kidnapping.” They want to hinder the ability of law enforcement to arrest people.
They will make it easier for criminals to get away while turning popular opinion against the police.
That is the ultimate goal of newspeak, to destroy the existing good in society by destroying the language.
I realize the law enforcement in this case are in fact law enforcement, and not the military. But since I’ve heard a number of hyperventilating communists suggest that these are “troops” and this might be a “dry run for martial law”, it might be time to remind the communists/democrats that Obama the messiah signed into law the NDAA in 2009, which allows the U.S. Military to actually kidnap and hold without trial enemy combatants, and this can include American citizens.
We here can all guess how this provision would have eventually been applied if Hillary had won, and might still be if the democrats manage to retake everything. They should be thankful Trump hasn’t taken the path democrats eventually will try to.
Yes, under Obama’s Law, anyone who is a “member of a terrorist organization” can be detained without trial or warrant ,and surveiled at will. All the government has to do is declare them or some organization they belong to as a “terrorist” organization. Who’d have thought that might be problematic (kind of like building a “revert to tyranny” clause into nation, state and local laws where the head executive only needs to declare a “state of emergency” to be given full authority to “make all needful rules and regulations to safeguard the public safety” without bothering with inconvenient “votes” and Congress).
The funny thing is that if Trump were a REAL tyrant, he would be rounding up members of Antifa at will, arresting and detaining them without warrant, since Antifa is now officially a “terrorist organization”. He is doing nothing of the kind, yet he gets no credit for it from the media. Yet I will bet money the leftists won’t be so nice when they get in power again. This is the real reason for their increase in rhetoric about the NRA being a “terrorist organization”. Laying the ground work. And of course let’s not forget all those dangerous Right Wing Whtie Supremacist Terrorists causing all that mayhem. They will be first on the list, to establish precedence and to get people accustomed to the idea.
So-called ‘terrorism expert’ Brian Boyd doesn’t know what he is talking about. The police don’t need to read you your rights when you are arrested. They only need to do so before you are questioned with regard to a crime that you are suspected of committing. Too many people think that not having your rights read to you is some sort of ‘get out of jail free’ card. That is not true.
Slight correction, Divemedic. They do not have to read you your rights EVER. It is not a requirement.
So the cops are watching you with video cameras running. You get a knife from inside your bag, you threaten a shop owner with the knife and take off with the cash from the drawer.
As you are leaving the shop, the cops arrest you.
They haul you down to lock up, (no reading of your rights). On the way the cop looks at you and says “Why did you do it?” and you respond, knowing your rights have not been read to you, “I was bored.”
Now they come to court, simple bench trial (no jury). The prosecutor says “Here is video of bad guy getting the knife, here is video of him coming into the shop with the knife, here is video of him threatening the shop owner, here is video of him leaving with the cash and the cops arresting him.”
Judge: Guilty.
Defendant: But they never read me my rights!
Judge: They didn’t use anything you said. The evidence shows you did it.
Correct, although in practice it doesn’t stop them from asking all kinds of questions right off the bat, “rights” or no. My experience (limited) is that they seem to treat it as an annoying technicality, as long as you sign the piece of paper saying “I have been read my rights and understand them” before yu are released, they don’t seem to care. I was arrested twice, and I mildly pointed out to the officers that I HADN’T been read my rights at any time, nor were they listed on the paper I was signing. I figured it was best not to rock the boat, since it wasn’t a serious charge an I just wanted to go home. So there is certainly room for improvement in the police departments. Kind of unfortunate, actually, with the left attacking the police so brutally and constantly, it has an effect much like their constant attacks on Trump: it just makes people who would normally be willing to be reasonable, and who would agree that the police could be improved lock ranks and fall in to defend the police, or Trump. Normal people who would typically be ready to agree there is room for improvement now stand firm and say “no, the police are perfect!”, and they refuse to admit when Trump does make mistakes (I’m not blaming them, I am one of these people myself). But it’s unfortunate. Unless of course they are TRYING to force the right into reactionary tendencies, making them defend the apparently undefendable, and so taking their credibility away.
Divemedic is right. I once sent a guy to prison for five years without asking him a single question (other than non-incriminating booking info). I never read him his rights, either, and the AUSA and the judge knew it. Since I didn’t ask him any questions, I didn’t need to read him his rights. The case was made with fingerprints and paper.
The NYPD needs to walk into deBolshevik’s office and ask him if he’d like to continue enjoying the protection of the police.
I wouldn’t normally condone such a tactic, but deBolshy is such a lowlife he’s earned the abuse.
In the 80s there was a movie call The Warriors. In it, a gang leader in NYC realized the gangs outnumbered the police by a significant margin. The only reason why the plan to unite the gangs failed was because of internal fighting between the gangs, and some jackass trying to stir up trouble (for no reason other than stirring up trouble) killed the organizer.
Right now, the mob realizes they outnumber the police, and they have a compliant media, and complicit city administration on their side. However, it is only a matter of time before reality mimics fiction. I have no doubt, this mob will destroy itself. The question is when, and how much damage will be inflicted before they self destruct.
Meh.
Idjit wannabe commie are freaking out cuz they are seeing there are consequences to their shenanigans.
Meh I say. :::grabs popcorn:::
If the unmarked Vans are banned the police will have to use larger and larger groups of officers to make arrests resulting in bigger problems and riots