Brandon Johnson Had The Legal right To Kill Officer Jerry Piland
Brandon Johnson Had The Legal Right To Kill Officer Jerry Piland
|
Yep!! You read it right. Brandon Johnson had the legal right to kill
Prosecutor Carl Brizzi ruled that Brandon, nor his brother Vincent,
“Officer Jeff Patterson, who teaches combative and defensive |
“Patterson” went on to “testified that a knee to the
head could be considered deadly force because it
could have lethal consequences, 6News' Jack Rinehart
reported.
“Patterson said that under the circumstances of the
encounter that were described, other officers were
already grappling with Johnson and that it would not
have been appropriate for Piland to knee Johnson
in the head. "I can't see anything that would justify
that level of deadly force, resorting to a technique
that could result in death," he said.
The Indiana Court of Appeal says that a person, and bystanders, can
use the force necessary to stop the illegal arrest. Officer
Jeff Patterson testified at the Merit Board hearing that
kneeing someone to the head is deadly force. Piland was
using deadly force to assist in an illegal arrest. Therefore,
Brandon was within his right to resist the illegal arrest with
deadly force that made him look like he does in this picture. 
The impact of this law is the Merit Board is hanging
its decision on the IMPD internal affairs report that
indicates that Brandon resisted which justified
Carney and Clothier's use of force. The prosecutor’s
decision that says Brandon nor Vincent did anything
that rose to the level of being a crime means their
arrest was illegal. The courts have ruled that if the
arrest is illegal then the person can use force, even
deadly force, to stop the arrest. Because the arrest
was illegal then even if Brandon did use force he was
well within his legal right to do so. That means the
IMPD internal affairs report, and the Merit Board
should know the law and recognize Brandon did not
break the law even if he resisted being arrested!!
Don’t get mad at me! The Bible tells one to seek and
you will find. I sought and I found that a person
can kill a police officer who is trying to make an illegal
arrest and the killing is sanctioned by law. If a person
does not kill the officer to stop the illegal arrest then in
essence the person is volunteering to be a slave. Are
not Brandon and Vincent Americans? Is it right to counsel
them to do something other than excercise their rights. If they
allow the illegal arrest and the deadly force that was used
against Brandon is successful and kills him, then he would
have no recourse of civil action in a court of law. He would
be dead because he didn't resist the illegal arrest with the
force necessary to stop it. To not resist the arrest is
allowing our democracy to be a police state!! Are we as
Americans afraid to exercise our rights. If we don’t exercise
our rights then we have allowed the government to put
slavery back into affect. Are you volunteering for that!! I pray
not. Let's unite black and white and stop this madness.
Thank you for listening to AjabuSpeaks. Tune in to
AjabuUnleashed. http://www.thewarhorn.com It is going to be
a hot time in the old town.
The article below is more info. It is a must read.
The Natural & Common Law Right of Self Defense
"Common as the event may be, it is a serious thing to arrest a
citizen, and it is a more serious thing to search his person; and
he who accomplishes it, must do so in conformity to the law of the
land. There are two reasons for this; one to avoid bloodshed, and
the other to preserve the liberty of the citizen. Obedience to the
law is the bond of society, and the officers set to enforce the
law are not exempt from its mandates." Town of Blacksburg v. Bean
104 S.C. 146. 88 S.E. 441 (1916): Allen v. State, 197 N.W. 808, 810-11
(Wis 1924)
"Where officers do not conform to the 'law of the land' they have
no authority and the right to resist them exists. A Public Officer,
as with a citizen, who unlawfully threatens life or liberty, is
susceptible to be injured or killed; for by such acts 'they draw
their own blood upon themselves' As stated in some cases, 'where
a peace officer has no right to make an arrest without warrant he
is a trespasser and acts at his own peril." 6A CJS., "Arrest"
Section 16 page 30; A sheriff who "acts without process," or
"under a process void on its face, in doing such act, he is not to
be considered an officer but a personal trespasser." Roberts v. Dean,
187 So. 571, 575 (Fla. 1939)
"A person has a lawful right to resist an arrest by an unlawful
authority, i.e., an officer without a valid warrant." Franklin,118 Ga. 860, 45 S.E. 698 (1903)
"What of the resistance to the arrest? The authorities are in
agreement that since the right of personal property is one of the
fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, any unlawful
interference with it may be resisted and every person has a right
to resist an unlawful arrest. * * * and, in preventing such illegal
restraint of his liberty, he may use such force as may be necessary."
City of Columbus v. Holmes, 152 N.W. 2d, 301, 306 (Ohio App. 1058)
"It is the law of self defense and self preservation that is
applicable. "One has and "unalienable" right to protect his life,
liberty or property from unlawful attack or harm." "* * * it is not
an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer,
even though he may have submitted to such custody without resistance."
Adarns v. State, 121 Ga 163, 48 S.E. 910 (1904)
"An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted
to be restrained of his liberty has the same right, and only the same
right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any
other assault and battery." State v. Robinson, 145 Me. 77, 72 Atl, 2nd.260, 262 (1950)
"A citizen illegally arrested "cannot initiate the use of force" and
neither do "words alone justify an assault." However, "when the officer
initiates the assault by physical contact, which is usually the case,
and there is an unlawful arrest, the citizen has the right to protect
his liberty to the extent of killing the officer." See Green v.
Kennedy, 48 N.Y. Rep. 653, 654 (1871) and/or Hicks v. Matthews, 266
S.W. 2nd. 846, 849 (Tex. 1954)
"What rights then has a citizen in resisting an unlawful arrest? An
arrest without warrant is a trespass, an unlawful assault upon the
person, and how far one thus unlawfully assaulted may go in resistance
is to be determined as in other cases of assault. Life and liberty are
regarded as standing substantially on one foundation; life being
useless without liberty, and the authorities are uninformed that where
one is about to be unlawfully deprived of his liberty he may resist
the aggressions of the officer, to the extent of taking the life of
the assailant, if that be necessity to preserve his own life, or
prevent infliction upon him of some great bodily harm." State v. Gum,
68 W. Va. 105, 69 S.E. 463, 464 (1910)
"It is the law that a person illegally arrested by an officer may
resist that arrest, even to the extent of the taking of life if his
own life or any great bodily harm is threatened. State v. Rousseau,
40 Wash. 2nd, 92, 241 P. 2nd. 447, 449 (1952); Porter v. State, 124
Ga. 297, 52 S.E. 283, 287 (1905); see also State v. Mobley, 240 N.C.
476, 83 S.E. 2nd 100, 102 (1954); Wilkinson v. State, 143 Miss. 324,
108 So. 711, 712-13 (1926); American Jurisprudence, 2nd Ed., "Arrest",
Section 94, pp. 778-780; Thomas v. State, 91 Ga. 204, 18 S.E. 305
(1892); Presley v. State, 75 Fla. 434, 78 So. 532, 534 (1918);
Burkhard v. State, 83 Tex. Crim. 228, 202 S.W. 513; Mullins v. State,
196 Ga. 569, 27 S.E. 2nd. 91 (1943); Ownes v. State, 58 Tex. Crim.
261, 125 S.W. 405 (1910); Caperton v. Commonwealth, 189 Ky. 652, 655,
225 S.W. 481, 481 (1920)
"The United States Supreme Court, and every other court in the past
deciding upon the matter, has recognized that "at common Law", a
person had the right to "resist the illegal attempt to arrest him."
John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529, 534-35 (1899)
1. State v. Robinson, 145 Me 77, 72 Alt. 2d 260, 262 (1950)
2. State v. Gum, 68 W. Va. 105
3. State v. Rouseau, 40 Wash. 2d. 92, 241, 242 P.2d 447, 449 (1952)
4. State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 446, 83 S.E., 2d 100, 102 (1954)
5. Wilkinson v. State, 143 Miss. 324, 108 So. 711
6. Thomas v. State, 91 Ga. 204, 18 SE 305
7. Presley v. State, 75 Fla. 434, 78 So. 523
8. Burkhardt v. State, 83 Tex Crim 228, 202 S.W. 513
9. Mullis v. State, 196 Ga. 569, 27 SE 2d 91 (1943)
10. Owen v. State, 58 Tex Crim 261, 125 S.W. 405 (1910)
11. Franklin,118 Ga. 860, 45 S.E. 698 (1903)
12. Graham v. State, 143 Ga. 440 85 S.E. 328, 331
13. City of Columbus v. Holmes, 152 N.W. 2d, 301, 306 (Ohio App. 1058)
14. Adams v. State, 121 Ga 163, 48 S.E. 910 (1904)
15. Robertson v. State, 198 S. W2d 633, 635-36 Tenn. (1947)
16. Roberts v. Dean, 187 So. 571, 575 Fla. 1939
17. The State of Connecticut against Leach, 7 Conn, Rep. 452 (1829)
18. Housh v. The People, 75 ILL Rep. 487, 491 (1874)
19. Plummer v. The State, 135 Ind. 308, 313, 334 N.E. 968 (1893)
20. John Bad Elk v. U.S. 177 U.S. 529 (1899)
21. People v. Hevern, 127 Misc. Rep. 141, 215 NY Supp 412
22. U.S. v. Cerciello, 86 NJL 309, 90 Atl.1112, (1914)
23. U.S. v. Kelly, 51 Fed 2d 263 (1931)
24. Bednarik v. Bednarik, 16 A 2d, 80, 90, 18 NJ Misc. 633 (1948)
25. State v. Height, 117 Iowa 650, 91 NW 935
26. People v. Corder, 244 Mich. 274, 221 NW 309
27. Boyd v. U.S., 116 U.S. 616
28. State v. Newcomb, 220 Mo 54 119 SW 405
29. Town of Blacksburg v. Bean, 104 S.C. 146. 88 S.E. 441 (1916)
30. Allen v. State, 197 N.W. 808, 810-11(Wis 1924)
31. Adarns v. State, 121 Ga 163, 48 S.E. 910 (1904) Green v.Kennedy, 48 N.Y. Rep. 653, 654 (1871)
32. Hicks v. Matthews, 266 S.W. 2nd. 846, 849 (Tex. 1954)
33. Porter v. State, 124 Ga. 297, 52 S.E. 283, 287 (1905)
34. Mullins v. State,196 Ga. 569, 27 S.E. 2nd. 91 (1943)
35. Caperton v. Commonwealth, 189 Ky. 652, 655, 225 S.W. 481, 481 (1920)
Rev. Ajabu
28 Comments
4 References
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to FriendReferences (4)
-
Response: Brycen[...]- Ajabu Speaks - Brandon Johnson Had The Legal right To Kill Officer Jerry Piland[...] -
Response: louis vuitton outlet- Ajabu Speaks - Brandon Johnson Had The Legal right To Kill Officer Jerry Piland
-
Response: have a peek hereFantastic Web page, Preserve the very good job. Thanks for your time!
-
Response: check over hereNeat Webpage, Preserve the beneficial work. Thanks a lot.
Reader Comments (28)
He couldn't kill them. No matter what the law is. Ajabu I support u. But don't start talking about cop killings .. I'm not down with that!!! I'm glad that we have police. But we do have some crooked ones. But noone deserves to die. And Brandon Johnson shouldnt kill anyone. Let's set the RIGHT example Ajabu!!!!! Don't get too crazy! We still an example for the young black community. And we don't want them killing the police!!! Come on now!!
Alicia,
My sister, do you know what you are saying when you say "he couldn't have killed him no matter what the law is"? Maybe you want to say he should not kill the officer but by law he surely has and had the right to take Piland right off the face of the earth. don't get mad at me. This is the law. I am not down with cop killings either so long as they stay within the law. Beating an unarmed child like they beat Brandon and he had not committed any offense is unacceptable. Who in their right mind would support Brandon experiencing such a beating when he did commit a crime? Now are you saying we should support an innocent child being beat like Brandon was beat just because it was the police doing the beating? Come on Alicia!! Wake up. Better yet, stand up for your rights. We can't allow our children to get beat down and even shot down, even killed without stopping the beater or the killer. The law says we have the right to do so. I believe in following the law. It is what makes America America. Are we not Americans?
Dude, you have so strayed off the reservation!!!
Abdul,
Of all people. You are a lawyer. Surely you support the law. In fact when you passed the bar, well you did pass the bar didn't you?, Well if you did then you took an oath to uphold the law. this is the law. I have never been on a reservation and don't plan on going peacefully. I believe in the law. The law is what makes America America. Ain't I an American?
Minister Ajabu,
Greetings and peace to you and yours. Judging by the comments you have received regarding your exposing the LAW to the people, there is an expectation that this information will create more tension and violence.
I submit that the truth is to the contrary. I believe this information could reduce the violence inflicted upon the Black community. For too long we have felt helpless in the face of police brutality. Even when we appeal to this citys administration, there is an atmosphere of denial and a cloak of protection thrown over these rogue cops.
We sometimes forget that we, the people create agencies for our use, not the other way around. People in a civilized society place limits on these agencies, just as we place limits upon ourselves. Those who violate those limits can be found to have broken the LAW and thus, liable for discipline. The police are not exempt, just as we are not exempt.
Your research reveals that the police do not unlimited authority over the people. In fact, the law tells us that the people have the right to defend themselves, even kill a police officer, if and when when they are abusing their authority. What does this mean then?
It means that when both parties (the people and the police) should be aware of the limitations imposed upon them by the law, conduct themselves accordingly and peace will likely prevail.
On the other hand if one of the parties violates the law, violence, indeed death can occur. This puts both parties on notice regarding their behavior, encouraging both to conduct themselves in such a way as to promote peace.
Unfortunately, most Americans have relinquished their rights under the law, because they don't know what those rights are. The police have no right to search your person or your vehicle without your permission or a search warrant or probable cause. Yet, due to our not knowing the law, we give the police permission to look for ways to put us in jail.
The police have no right to detain you without probable cause. In other words, if you are walking down the street and the police stop you and begin questioning you, you may refuse to answer and simply ask, "Am I free to go or am I being detained?" If the police want to arrest you, REMAIN SILENT and seek counsel. You have the right to remain silent and give the police no reason to arrest you.
These are just a few tips that we should all know and apply whenever we have an encounter with the police. It has been said that if you fail to exercise your rights, YOU HAVE NONE.
If the police are poorly trained regarding observing the law while performing their duties and the people are ignorant of their rights under law, given the racial tension in this country,doesn't this help us understand the rise of incidents of police brutality and outright murder upon minorities across this country?
To get some help, I would strongly suggest that your audience obtain a copy of a DVD that is circulating in town. It is called "10 Rules For Dealing With The Police" and it provides a brief summary on some of our rights and the limits imposed on the police. I would encourage everyone to obtain a copy at www.flexyourrights.com Very valuable information, perhaps lifesaving.
In closing, please keep up the good work of not just speaking truth to power, but also providing valuable information to an uninformed American public. The Scripture does say, "My people are dying due to a lack of knowledge." Peace my brother.
Wes,
That DVD of which you speak does have some good info and is sponsored by the Marijuana Project. By showing it could it not be construed that you support the legalization of the whacky weed?
I think the information needs to be divorced from the Marijuana Project's agenda. What say you?
@Abdul
Perhaps you meant to write, "Dude you have strayed off the plantation."
I for one am glad that he has. Scarry negros are a drag on our race. Sell-out negros are a drag on our race. If we had fewer negros like you, Abdul, and more brothers like Ajabu, the police would not dare put their hands on our children for fear of the consequences.
Sister Alicia, when you have a man willing to kill and die for you to be safe don't worry about how he keeps you safe. If you can't bear to look at it, then go in the house and don't look at it. Just let him keep you safe.
War!
Litha,
There is hope!! God bless you. There is hope. Forever forward!! Never Backward. We must not be afraid to be free.
geez ass...very sad indeed here.
Jayson
Stupid niggers
http://www.gbmnews.com/articles/4047/1/NYC-LGBT-Blacks-Celebrate-Kwanza/Page1.html
(New York, NY) On an alter was a kinara with seven candles, three green, three red and one solitary black in the middle; an African statuette and a varied collection of fruits. Close to 300 people gathered for the 21st Annual Black Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Kwanza celebration, which was held on Dec 27, in the Michael Lerner room at the LGBT Community Center. The celebration was the culmination of a day of activities which included an African market, a cultural program and a Karamu or community feast.
Jayson,
What do you see as being sad? Are not I, Litha and plenty others supposed be upset that an innocent young black male youth is beat up by the police for no legal reason? To beat him up and be legal would be appalling enough. Howevere, prosecutor Brizzi ruled that Brandon, nor his brother exhibited behavior that rose to the level of being a crime. Man we are sick of it. The law gives us the right to resist this illegal police behavior. Plummer vs. State of Indiana (1893) ruled that citizen's have the right to use deadly force if necessary to repel an illegal arrest. Shane Wilson vs State of Indiana (2006) affirmed the Plummer case. The judges that confirmed Plummer in Wilson still to this day sit on the Indiana Court of Appeals bench. It is time for citizens in this city to no longer be afraid to be free. Our freedonm must be excercised within the rhealm that the law affords. The law affords us the right to kill a police officer that tryies to use force to afford his/her illegal arrest. We must abide by the law.
Antoine, I pray that God blesses you and The Man. You are both special.
-absurdity simply makes you more irrelevant.....
But while your at it- why not raise some money for those 15 yr old kids who don't have guns and bullets now, so they can be sure to point one at a cop for Christmas.
so much for Ajabu becoming a man of peace!
Poor Jayson
You are still trying to support the wrongdoing of corrupt and dirty cops. You don't have to worry about one beating or killing you because you are one of them. Your sick racist ass will defend any slaughter of Black people no matter who the perpetrator is.
Don't get mad with Rev Ajabu because he cites the law of this land. You don't want me to delineate the number of cops who have murdered Black innocent men in this country. I wonder why they don't make fatal mistakes with White boys and men. You have the right to defend yourself, you even have the right to not remain silent.
We have a cop in our community who hit a mentally challenged 56 year old Black man so hard in the face that his eye protruded out of its socket. The cop is in a big lawsuit and the Chief of Police is resigning. The man died two months later of seizures.
You have to punish dirty cops. And citizens need to protect themselves by any means necessary from murderous beasts who wear a uniform.
There will come a time when we won't have this problem. It is just a matter of time.
john
Jayson,
Why are you so sarcastic? Who would raise money so a fifteen year old could buy guns and bullets? This is so asinine. If a fifteen year old has a gun and bullets and a cop tries to illegally arrest them then that fifteen year old is justified by law to use fire the gun with bullets if it is necessary to stop the illegal arrest. That is the law. The fifteen year has the right to bear arms because of the 2nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That is the law. Why do you have a problem with the law. Plummer vs State of Indiana (1893) gives all citizens the right to repel an illegal arrest by an officer with deadly force if necessary. This right comes with our citizenship. Are we not Americans? Surely you are not implicating that we should not excercise the rights we have as Americans. To not do so would be to volunteer for slavery. Those days are gone and never to return. There is a song that says I will die and be buried in my grave before I become a slave. I would just change the word "die" to "kill" in accordance with the law expressed in Plummer and confirmed by the Indiana Appeals Court in Wilson vs Indiana (2006)
Now Roy,
Just because I have become an ordained preacher does not mean I have given up my rights as an American. For some reason some people wants some people to just act like we are Americans without excercising the rights that citizenship gives us. There are some of us who are not afraid to be free.
Now I removed a couple of responses. I cannot believe that someone would be so insensitive to the Allemenos family as to put their daughte's grave on this website. That type of insensitivty will not be tolerated on this website!! We can disagree without be that insensitive. Lord, who ever posted that post please forgive whether they know what they do or not. Amen!!
Thus, even if we assume for the sake of the argument that Ajabu, Walls, and Adams did not initially plan to kill anyone found inside the home, the evidence at trial showed that Ajabu brought a knife and duct tape with him to commit the crime. Thus, it was reasonable to infer that, at the very least, the men planned to use force to confine anyone found inside the home. The evidence also showed that, once inside the home, Ajabu helped confine the victims and stood over Nick with a knife after Walls had cut Christopher’s throat. In sum, it was reasonable for the jury to infer that the victims’ murders were a natural and probable consequence of the planned robbery and that Ajabu willingly participated as an accomplice.
Dr. Lardy,
LOL... where you been???, did you get your head stuck in the doughnut bag again?
I don't think I've ever encountered a bigger moron, than yourself. You're head is so far jammed into a wet,smelly dark place you've lost your sanity.
Why don't you go out tonite and put your money where your fatmouth is.....be the big man you think you are and go interfere with some police arrests tonight.....please be sure to post a picture of your fat face when you wake up.. and No fair beating your face against your bed post either....although that might be the most excitement it's seen in awhile.
Looks like absurdity will reign here.....
Jayson
DA,
I don't know what your post has to do with our right to resist illegal arrest, however their is a connection. just like we have the right to kill someone who comes into our home without our invitation we also have the right to kill a cop that comes into our home without invitation or a warrant. Cops do not have special priviledges that allow them to do other than what the law requires of the rest of us. Those are the rights we have as American citizens. It is truly unfortunate that the people in that house were victims of my son's presence. Not that he was the perpetrator of anyone losing their life, but because he was even there. If he had been killed while in that house at that time then the person that did the killing would have been legally justified. That is the law. I and my family, to include Kofi, truly regret that Kofi was in that house under those circumstances. Our heartfelt sympathies go out to each and everyone of the members of those families. I personally extend my apology for saying things that I now know had to be hurtful to the Allemenos and the James families. I pray that God gives them comfort, and gives them the strength for forgiveness particularly to my son and I. My family is not proud of that experience. We pray for forgiveness and for God to work it out so we can share our forgiveness directly to each family.
I believe that God has forgiven, yet that does not change the law. The law is that we as American citizens can use the force necessary to resist an illegal arrest by a cop. Brandon had the legal right by law to kill Carney, Clothier and Piland. All of them took part in an illegal arrest where deadly force was used. Piland used deadly force. Knee striking someone in the head is deadly force. Officer Patterson who trained all of these officers testified as such at the Merit Board hearing. Brandon could legally have used deadly force to repel the arrest (State vs Plummer 1893). That's the law.
Just as I have asked the Allemenos and James families for forgiveness I think it appropriate for Officers Carney, Clothier and Piland to ask Brandon and his family to forgive them for beating him. To beat that youth like that was totally unnecessary. They should ask to be forgiven. I believe it would help race relations and possibly start a necessary cycle of forgiveness.
Jason,
You told me that you were not trying to do the black or white thing. You were trying to do the right thing. The right thing is for you to help Brandon's family. What I say or do does not change the rightness of you helping that family. If you don't want to do the right thing you shouldn't use my actions as your excuse to justify doing the wrong thing. Do the right thing.
John,
It is good to hear from you. God bless.
Re. Mmoja Ajabu: "I believe that God has forgiven, yet that does not change the law"
Reverend, The law that you keep emphasizing has convicted your son as an accomplice in a triple murder. This conviction has withstood multiple appeals over 13 years.He may not have held the knife, but he is guilty under the same set of laws you keep quoting.
But keep it up. Every time you deny his guilt, you reset the clock on his sentence. A parole board will never let him out. Thank-you for helping to lengthen his incarceration.
God bless you.
DA,
This discussion is about a person's legal right to resist an illegal arrest. How does my son's case fit into it? Parole is not a possiblity. He has 240 years. He has to do 120 before going before the board. Those are the facts. But I am still baffled on how his case has anything to do with the discussion. Is this an attempt to divert the discussion? Please help me.
No, you help me.
The mission statement of your site is to "...increase the love, decrease the hate"
You are talking about killing people.I only joined the discussion- still on topic.
The mission statment is right on target. I am talking about the right to kill a cop if it is necessary to stop an illegal arrest. That has nothing to do with people getting killed from a home invasion. Stay focused. Just killing is not the topic. Stay focused or we will be talking about killing in Afghanistan, Iraq, suicide, etc. All that is about killing, but it has nothing to do with a citizens right to use deadly force to stop an illegal arrest. Stay focused.
There is a hearing on Brandon Johnson's civilian police complaint:
Where: City County Bldg RM 118
When: Dec. 16, 2010
Time: 6PM
See you there.
The police have been killing and beating people for so long it is not a surprise that not a thing was done to the officers invovled in the Bradon beating. (Color is not issue?) Color is always and will always be the issue. Racism is alive and well, and not enough of our young black people in Indianapolis, Indiana want to stand up for our rights. So, this state is going to keep pushing us around and puting slave stautes all around town to remind us that we are so called "not thing but slaves" in their eyes.