Laws of Arrest - too much for some people to understand ?

[Lynch Mob]

I understand what you are saying, but I still believe there is a significant difference in criminal v. civil law. Criminal law requires a conviction when a crime can be proven beyond a doubt whereas a civil law verdict in favor of the plaintiff is based on a preponderance of the evidence - a standard far below the one required for a guilty verdict in a criminal case.

In CT, USA, where I reside, I am not able to define when a detention becomes an arrest according to state law. (However, detention here for shoplifting is practiced by LPO's, but LE is dispatched to decide whether an arrest is justified, at which point an arrest and case number are issued.)

Since I am not LP and work unarmed, I have no reason to detain because I am not going to make a citizen's arrest unless I am able to safely stop a class A/B felony - which is highly unlikely.

What I can do though, is ask the suspect if they would be willing to help me resolve some questions regarding a situation. (Sounds silly, but it's just a way to stall until the police arrive) This protects me in the event I am mistaken, since their stay is voluntary - they agreed to it.

I understand the difference in levels of proof when convicting of a crime or when filing a lawsuit. However, that is not what we were talking about. We were talking about the legal definition of an arrest. That definition is the same in criminal and civil courts. There is no difference at those two levels.

Now, if we are talking about the act of false arrest, and the required proof for some legal action against the person making the false arrest, you should be even more concerned about the definition of a legal arrest. The reason is because the defendant would be you (or any LP agent). If you don't understand what constitutes an arrest, how could you reasonably defend yourself against someone pressing criminal charges, or filing a civil suit?

Your state may not have a Citizen's Arrest laws, but that does not mean you have not passed the point of detention and made a legal arrest by taking someone into custody. It is important that people realize the distinction.

[NRM_Oz]

I am curious about Maelstrom's post as he is in another state below mine (I know we feel sorry for the Mexicans being south of the border) but I had a Victorian State Licence so will be curious to find out more about this. I don't understand how anyone can arrest on suspicion except for a peace officer, law enforcement officer and special constable (pretend cop). Forget the liabilities to a company but most police will just laugh at your arrest unless you get a confession and if it goes to court it will probably be tossed out by a judge.

Maelstrom - I mean no offence just curious as to where I should look to read more about your arrest conditions.

[Nauticus]

We can assist in an arrest where someone is being chased by a peace officer, but we do not arrest under these circumstances. If someone is chasing someone else, yelling "he just attacked me", you have no reasonable cause to make any arrest. Again, in Canada, you can't lawfully arrest somebody unless you witness the offense, or you're a peace officer.

This is how I learnt it in all of my programs, and this is what all the companies I've ever worked for see it, so this is the way I tend to believe it's true.

[HotelSecurity]

Really?

In Canada, you have to personally witness an indictable offense in order to arrest correctly. Otherwise, it's false arrest. A citizen cannot arrest 'in suspicion of' anything. It has to be 100% absolutely positive that the person did something, and you witnessed it.

My company also does read section 10 (a) and (b) and the official warning (their rights to remain silent, contact a lawyer, etc). But then, we try and get confessions, and they're aren't allowed unless the rights have been read to the arrested individual.

If I were you, I'd double check on what basis you can arrest. I know Canada and Australia have very similar criminal codes, and I'm positive Canada is run that way (I've got a degree in Criminology, and I've done half a dozen diploma certification courses on the Criminal Justice System). Better safe than sorry

Not exactly right. The owner of property or his agent can arrest for Summary Conviction offences also. (For my US friends: A citizen can arrest only when he witnesses a Felony - the owner of property or his agent can arrest for ANY criminal code offence he witnesses it does not have to be a felony).

Also we can arrest with reasonable & probable grounds if the suspect is being chased by someone who legally can arrest them. If have arrested in this situation where a mugging victim has yelled "stop him, he just attacked me".

[Nauticus]

Well he's lucky we're not governed by lsamic laws then... there's every likelyhood he'd have lost a hand

It's interesting to note the differences in arrest SOP from country to country, let alone from state to state (of the same nation), down here NRM IF we question the party arrested... the case goes to hell in a hand basket! that's all there is to it, but if they decide to blabber on anyway well we simply right all that down and pass it on

Miranda? cautions? we keep it simple... you're under arrest for... [what ever offence] and that's it, and as far as citizen's arrest powers those aren't specifically limited to 'finds committing' here, reasonable suspicion of a crime (ie. offender with hammer in hand before a busted window) or escape from lawful custody (or suspicion of) is also sufficient grounds to effect an arrest... though in today's litigation riddled society it's only recommend SOs/citizens act on 'finds committing'

Really?

In Canada, you have to personally witness an indictable offense in order to arrest correctly. Otherwise, it's false arrest. A citizen cannot arrest 'in suspicion of' anything. It has to be 100% absolutely positive that the person did something, and you witnessed it.

My company also does read section 10 (a) and (b) and the official warning (their rights to remain silent, contact a lawyer, etc). But then, we try and get confessions, and they're aren't allowed unless the rights have been read to the arrested individual.

If I were you, I'd double check on what basis you can arrest. I know Canada and Australia have very similar criminal codes, and I'm positive Canada is run that way (I've got a degree in Criminology, and I've done half a dozen diploma certification courses on the Criminal Justice System). Better safe than sorry

[Nauticus]

Evidently, based on the difference in posts defining arrest, etc., arrest laws are clearly not easy to understand. While I am not an attorney, I tend to side w/ Curtis on understanding this issue for the USA. Some of the confusion with detention = arrest may stem from the difference in criminal v. civil law. What I mean is this: While you may or may not be criminally charged for an improper detention, the civil end of it is a whole different ballgame and lawsuits have been won because a person believed they were not free to leave when detained by security. (Not LP)

As a result, most WBS companies strongly discourage detainment unless absolutely necessary. "Any doubts - DON'T DO IT!" is the safe and wise course of action unless you have been specifically trained in understanding the finer points of law regarding detainment and arrest in your jurisdiction.

In Canada, detention by a private citizen is not defined in the Criminal Code. Peace officers are allowed to detain people as they relate to incidents under investigation. Instead, citizens' arrest is defined as "stopping a person from continuing his or her regular activities" (or something to that extent). Therefore, the arrest begins immediately upon stopping a person.

[Maelstrom]

I have had people refuse to show me valid ID and I have advised them police of this as they are under NO obligation to do so. 1 bloke gave me 2 different names (Aussie and Muslim) which seems ok - then inside this wallet the Police found another 5 full sets of ID in 5 different aussie names. All this for a $240 bust on aftershave.

Well he's lucky we're not governed by lsamic laws then... there's every likelyhood he'd have lost a hand

It's interesting to note the differences in arrest SOP from country to country, let alone from state to state (of the same nation), down here NRM IF we question the party arrested... the case goes to hell in a hand basket! that's all there is to it, but if they decide to blabber on anyway well we simply right all that down and pass it on

Miranda? cautions? we keep it simple... you're under arrest for... [what ever offence] and that's it, and as far as citizen's arrest powers those aren't specifically limited to 'finds committing' here, reasonable suspicion of a crime (ie. offender with hammer in hand before a busted window) or escape from lawful custody (or suspicion of) is also sufficient grounds to effect an arrest... though in today's litigation riddled society it's only recommend SOs/citizens act on 'finds committing'

[NRM_Oz]

We have all had incidents of dealing with people of questionable backgrounds (after we find this out when the police visit) and I am not going to put my safety or that of others in jeopardy because of the need to make an arrest or to be a big shot. I want to go home at the end of the shift - alive.

If you still believe in "You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar" then you will know from experience that there is always a time to be nice and there is a time to be the drill instructor.

[Mr. Security]

Mr Security - that is how I was trained 20 years ago - ASK NICELY and you would be surprised what happens when you are nice to an SL / offender.....

Exactly. In fact, some criminals have even been known to sit down and wait for the cops to arrive after they commit the crime. While this surely isn't the rule, it isn't going to hurt to ask if you have reason to believe the person might comply.

[NRM_Oz]

Irish - you are correct 100% - must be seen to commit the act and not based on suspicion or speculation.

I have been employed for a few days many moons ago as a Consulate Constable and had special policing powers just inside the consultate and that meant I could detain and arrest on suspicion. N.A. - I only found out a few months back that the US does not mirandarise people in the security industry. Another forum on another site I had a `tin-pot hero` argue with me over this SOP (he works the same state as me and jumps from job to job) and I explained that in my 20 years and with access to current SOP's from 5 national retailers - we are still required to advise the SL that any information is voluntary. Some people will tell you everything as I am happy for them to BS away and tell me they are on parole, out of jail, have a need for a fix or have been arrested and waiting to go to court next week.

I just help the police when they arrive in their assessment and in my 20+ year career I have never been told my a police officer - no you are doing it wrong and your information is crapola. Trust me if I had to change anything I did, I would be the first to change. I work with 20 and 30 year police veterans who have ridden shotgun on hundreds of SL arrests and never have they once told me - you are doing it wrong or should do it this way.

Believe me I can't afford to screw up and in my position and wrote the SOP's for our company and with 20 ex police personnel with some 500 combined years of experience - feds and state - no1 has ever said my SOP's are incorrect. Even our legal team has gone through them with a fine tooth comb and agreed they are cautious but they are black and white.

[IrishGuard]

The problem with this topic is that those who are contributing are subject to the laws of the State or Country in which they work and in relation to the definition of Arrest it could be different and as the old saying goes, "You could all be marching to the sound of a different drum.

I have never heard of a distinction between Detain and Arrest, in my book if a person cannot leave of their own free will then they are under arrest.

If a police officer requests a suspect to accompany him to the police station to assist him in his inquiries, if the suspect has not been arrested then he can refuse to accompany the police officer.

The laws on arrest and detention are regarded by the courts as fundamental to the rights of any individual. All people must be free from having their liberty restrained for unlawful purposes or by improper procedures. The right to personal liberty is regarded by the courts as the most elementary and important of all common law rights.

What is an arrest?

An arrest consists of the seizure or the touching of a person's body with a view to his or her restraint. Words may amount to an arrest if they are calculated to bring to the person’s notice and do bring to the person’s notice that he or she is under a compulsion to accompany the police officer and he or she submits to the arrest.

Effect of an arrest

The major effect of an arrest, beside the restraint of the person's liberty, is that it starts the legal process that puts the person before a justice to be dealt with according to the law. This means that the person charged will appear before a court to answer the charge that the police have laid against him.

In my book there is no arrest powers in civil law ie matters of litigation.

It would appear that Australian and Canadian Legislation is similar in regard to Powers of Arrest being that they are based on British Law and I reckon I could safely say that in both countries where you are using citizen arrest powers, you must find the person committing the offence.

[N. A. Corbier]

Hey, folks? Anyone notice that in the commonwealth states and proviences, the private citizen is required to give "warning?" We call this the Miranda Warning here, and what are many of us taught?

NEVER GIVE MIRANDA, YOU ARE NOT A COP.

Anyone (In the US) been required to actually give the Miranda Warning before questioning a suspect, as a private citizen (security, not a law enforcement officer.)

[bigdog]

Lynchmob, here is a legal article discussing what detaining is VS arresting.

http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/detent.htm

[NRM_Oz]

Mr Security - that is how I was trained 20 years ago - ASK NICELY and you would be surprised what happens when you are nice to an SL / offender. I have had 1 bloke pull a commando knife on another person and knicked him with the blade tip in an argument. He agreed to come with me into the office and handed me the knife which was placed in an enveloped and sealed. I asked him to wait as the police would be hear soon to hear both sides of the story and he was willing to hand over his ID and other information without fuss. By asking you are not demanding or forcing the person under duress to comply with your demands.

[Mr. Security]

Lynch Mob

I understand what you are saying, but I still believe there is a significant difference in criminal v. civil law. Criminal law requires a conviction when a crime can be proven beyond a doubt whereas a civil law verdict in favor of the plaintiff is based on a preponderance of the evidence - a standard far below the one required for a guilty verdict in a criminal case.

In CT, USA, where I reside, I am not able to define when a detention becomes an arrest according to state law. (However, detention here for shoplifting is practiced by LPO's, but LE is dispatched to decide whether an arrest is justified, at which point an arrest and case number are issued.)

Since I am not LP and work unarmed, I have no reason to detain because I am not going to make a citizen's arrest unless I am able to safely stop a class A/B felony - which is highly unlikely.

What I can do though, is ask the suspect if they would be willing to help me resolve some questions regarding a situation. (Sounds silly, but it's just a way to stall until the police arrive) This protects me in the event I am mistaken, since their stay is voluntary - they agreed to it.