Clark wrote:
|| "~Nins~" wrote in
|| news:gQ3Ob.84718$na.45260@attbi_s04:
||
||| Clark wrote:
||||| Colin Campbell (remove underscore)
||||| wrote in :
|||||
|||||| On 17 Jan 2004 00:49:33 GMT, Clark stillnospam@me wrote:
||||||
||||||
||||||| I suggest you check into that further. "Arrest" may be a precise
||||||| legal term but field application of "arrest" may not be. If
||||||| anyone is "held" (prevented from moving at their disgression)
||||||| then it can be succussfully argued that they have been
||||||| arrested. The question to ask is "Am I free to leave or am I
||||||| being detained?" If the answer is detained then you have been
||||||| "arrested" and are due the protections of that status.
||||||
|||||| Wrong. Using this rule - anybody has the authority to 'arrest.'
|||||| This is why there is such a clear legal distinction between the
|||||| authority to 'arrest' and the authority to 'detain.'
||||||
||||||
||||| You are mistaken. Read the case law and look up the source of
||||| authority to arrest including citizens arrest. Anyone does have
||||| the authority to arrest.
|||
||| But, the power afforded is different for the respective parties -
||| parties being civilian or security officer, police - there are
||| limitations. Ever hear the term, "full police power or authority"?
||| I read someplace (forget where) that a "detainment becomes an
||| arrest when the arresting individual performs any act that
||| indicates an intention to take the person into custody and subjects
||| the person arrested to the actual control and will of the person
||| making the arrest. The specific determination is highly fact
||| based." Perhaps the distinction would be on how it is clarified in
||| definition in each State? But, the military is still bound by the
||| Comitatus Act and US Code in regards to levels of power afforded.
||| They don't actually 'arrest' but hold until the appropriate agency
||| with the appropriate level of power can do the actual arrest.
||| Well, that's my input, however accurate or inaccurate it may be,
||| and take on the issue of whether or not the military can arrest
||| civilians. It's a matter of definition of the word 'arrest' and
||| the limitations, and the powers of arrest afforded.
||
|| Semantics aside, it seems we agree - if a person is held by military
|| personnel for formal arrest by civilian authority, then the military
|| has arrested that person.

Then you didn't read or comprehend what I wrote. Sometimes words can be
used by society to encompass all things (such as the word *arrest*), but
that doesn't mean it is appropriate to do so. You used 'formal arrest', is
*informal* arrest an arrest in the specific legal definition of the word,
not the all-encompassing definition of society usage?