Adam Kokesh arrested

unsung

Kokesh was arrested tonight at a marijuana "smoke-in" and is being held without charges in a federal detention facility. When he was taken against his will he was mc-ing the event and encouraging others to stand up for their rights. He was not pushing for violence or was he in possession of marijuana at the time.

Pretty scary that someone can be simply taken away for no reason. In the arrest footage he is clearly seen standing when the police tried to tackle him.

His politics aside this should not be accepted.

Free

Along the same lines, but nothing to do with Kokesh,

http://www.newson6.com/story/22236012/t ... protesters
TransCanada Sues To Stop Oklahoma Keystone Pipeline Protesters

....."This lawsuit is a part of a broader corporate campaign of criminalizing dissent and delegitimizing opposition to this dangerous project, similar to Exxon's deliberate exclusion of press which amounted to a media blackout at the site of the Pegasus pipeline rupture, which released 5,000 barrels of diluted bitumen into residential Mayflower, Arkansas..."

unsung

He's being charged with resisting arrest, but that's not an arrestable offense.

unsung

Word is he will be charged with assault on a federal officer, the video shows that he was the one assaulted.

mikepegg44

unsung wrote:

Word is he will be charged with assault on a federal officer, the video shows that he was the one assaulted.

not surprising that Kokesh would get railroaded at some point.

unsung

He has a detention hearing set for Thursday, the reason is that he won't answer if he owns firearms or not.

These people make me sick. What's happening to this country?

vant0037

unsung wrote:

He's being charged with resisting arrest, but that's not an arrestable offense.

Read that again to yourself.

mikepegg44

vant0037 wrote:

unsung wrote:

He's being charged with resisting arrest, but that's not an arrestable offense.

Read that again to yourself.

this is a legitimate question, how can that be the only thing someone is charged with?



also, I love conspiracies as much as the next person, but this is a pretty interesting break down

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDTmIwqcqmE

the wolf

unsung wrote:

He has a detention hearing set for Thursday, the reason is that he won't answer if he owns firearms or not.

These people make me sick. What's happening to this country?

Who makes you sick? They guy who fought for our country but now opposes our involvement in Iraq, or the bastards that are railroading him?

vant0037

mikepegg44 wrote:

this is a legitimate question, how can that be the only thing someone is charged with?

There might be probable cause for a different charge (required to arrest), and during the course of that arrest, he resists (according to an officer) and is then arrested on that charge. A prosecutor might look at the facts, according to the officer, and go with his/her strongest set of facts. In other words, a prosecutor may review reports from a given officer which say "I attempted to arrest individual X for selling drugs. During the arrest, individual X resisted by repeatedly pulling away from me." The prosecutor may then review both possible charges and decide that the selling drugs charge isn't as strong for any number of reasons. The resisting arrest charge could very likely be the strongest case because the State's prime witness then becomes a police officer rather than a citizen witness. Boom, you've got a lone charge of resisting arrest.

Believe it or not, there are good prosecutors who do their jobs and review cases as they come in, rather than just rubber-stamping complaints against people. Coincidentally, that's why I find conspiracies along the lines of 1960s COINTELPRO (which were quite common then and resulted in arrests just like this) to be unlikely today. That's not to say people aren't targeted and arrested any more, but the federal government has different ways of getting you today (i.e. the IRS ).

mikepegg44

vant0037 wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

this is a legitimate question, how can that be the only thing someone is charged with?

There might be probable cause for a different charge (required to arrest), and during the course of that arrest, he resists (according to an officer) and is then arrested on that charge. A prosecutor might look at the facts, according to the officer, and go with his/her strongest set of facts. In other words, a prosecutor may review reports from a given officer which say "I attempted to arrest individual X for selling drugs. During the arrest, individual X resisted by repeatedly pulling away from me." The prosecutor may then review both possible charges and decide that the selling drugs charge isn't as strong for any number of reasons. The resisting arrest charge could very likely be the strongest case because the State's prime witness then becomes a police officer rather than a citizen witness. Boom, you've got a lone charge of resisting arrest.

Believe it or not, there are good prosecutors who do their jobs and review cases as they come in, rather than just rubber-stamping complaints against people. Coincidentally, that's why I find conspiracies along the lines of 1960s COINTELPRO (which were quite common then and resulted in arrests just like this) to be unlikely today. That's not to say people aren't targeted and arrested any more, but the federal government has different ways of getting you today (i.e. the IRS ).

thanks, I always assumed that if the charges you were originally arrested for were dropped the odds are, depending on the severity of resistance, those would be dropped as well.

vant0037

mikepegg44 wrote:

thanks, I always assumed that if the charges you were originally arrested for were dropped the odds are, depending on the severity of resistance, those would be dropped as well.

Could be. That's certainly within a prosecutor's discretion.

I just think it's worth noting that you can be arrested, charged and convicted solely for resisting arrest. I'm reading a lot of the comments under the news stories about his arrest (shame on me - I know) and it's befuddling the misinformation that these people are spouting.

unsung

If a cop tries tackling me for no reason other than I'm speaking into a microphone (peacefully and without inciting violence) and I defend myself then how exactly is that resisting arrest? Police don't have the right to assault someone that is not committing a crime.

unsung

the wolf wrote:

unsung wrote:

He has a detention hearing set for Thursday, the reason is that he won't answer if he owns firearms or not.

These people make me sick. What's happening to this country?

Who makes you sick? They guy who fought for our country but now opposes our involvment in Iraq, or the bastards that are reailroading him?

The ones "railroading" him.

vant0037

unsung wrote:

If a cop tries tackling me for no reason other than I'm speaking into a microphone (peacefully and without inciting violence) and I defend myself then how exactly is that resisting arrest? Police don't have the right to assault someone that is not committing a crime.

I'm not debating whether he actually was resisting arrest. I'm telling you you're wrong when you say it's not an "arrestable offense." There's marked misinformation surrounding many of these "conspiracy" stories. I'm doing my part to help out.

Cosmo

Slight off center here... but, is it legal to post (distribute) blueprints for gun parts... if those parts are owned by the manufacturer... even if you are not selling them?

vant0037

Cosmo wrote:

Slight off center here... but, is it legal to post (distribute) blueprints for gun parts... if those parts are owned by the manufacturer... even if you are not selling them?

Is this a post for Lost Dogs?

Cosmo

vant0037 wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

Slight off center here... but, is it legal to post (distribute) blueprints for gun parts... if those parts are owned by the manufacturer... even if you are not selling them?

Is this a post for Lost Dogs?

...
No.
I just know that Kokesh was distributing blueprints for guns on his website that were free for the taking. With those prints and a 3-D printer, you could make plastic parts to manufacturing specs. You'd probably want to mate them with acutal gun parts, such as the barrel, but you could make yourself a gun and bypass the whole gun buying process and thus, the requirement for any sort of background check.
I'm just wondering if those source documents are patented or copyrighted.

vant0037

Cosmo wrote:

vant0037 wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

Slight off center here... but, is it legal to post (distribute) blueprints for gun parts... if those parts are owned by the manufacturer... even if you are not selling them?

Is this a post for Lost Dogs?

...
No.
I just know that Kokesh was distributing blueprints for guns on his website that were free for the taking. With those prints and a 3-D printer, you could make plastic parts to manufacturing specs. You'd probably want to mate them with acutal gun parts, such as the barrel, but you could make yourself a gun and bypass the whole gun buying process and thus, the requirement for any sort of background check.
I'm just wondering if those source documents are patented or copyrighted.

I'm not a copyright attorney, but my sense is there may be some issues with that. I won't speculate because I don't know.

unsung

vant0037 wrote:

unsung wrote:

If a cop tries tackling me for no reason other than I'm speaking into a microphone (peacefully and without inciting violence) and I defend myself then how exactly is that resisting arrest? Police don't have the right to assault someone that is not committing a crime.

I'm not debating whether he actually was resisting arrest. I'm telling you you're wrong when you say it's not an "arrestable offense." There's marked misinformation surrounding many of these "conspiracy" stories. I'm doing my part to help out.

I just not see how one can be arrested solely based on resisting arrest. I can see how the charge would be in addition to the actual charge that he would have been arrested for. If I'm standing on a sidewalk minding my own business, not harming anyone, and a cop tries to tackle me are you telling me that I can't defend myself?

Cosmo

unsung wrote:

vant0037 wrote:

unsung wrote:

If a cop tries tackling me for no reason other than I'm speaking into a microphone (peacefully and without inciting violence) and I defend myself then how exactly is that resisting arrest? Police don't have the right to assault someone that is not committing a crime.

I'm not debating whether he actually was resisting arrest. I'm telling you you're wrong when you say it's not an "arrestable offense." There's marked misinformation surrounding many of these "conspiracy" stories. I'm doing my part to help out.

I just do not see how one can be arrested solely based on resisting arrest. I can see how the charge would be in addition to the actual charge that he would have been arrested for. If I'm standing on a sidewalk minding my own business, not harming anyone, and a cop tries to tackle me are you telling me that I can't defend myself?

...
You CAN... but, I wouldn't.
Me: Megaphone
Him: Nightstick... Taser... GUN... and a badge to shield himself.
He wins. I would lawyer up.