Mason County Deputies or Snowflakes?

[XLFD]

Your rights as an American citizen are not lost just because you live in or enter into Mason County.  Somebody has not told the county sheriff, Kim Cole, that that's the case with his weekend press release showcasing another debasement of the established freedom of two youthful visitors to this county

Manistee men arrested for disorderly conduct in Fountain.

FOUNTAIN — Two Manistee men, ages 17 and 21, were arrested Friday evening, Nov. 29, for being disorderly. According to Mason County Sheriff Kim Cole, deputies were initially called to the 5100 block of William Street at 9:27 p.m. for a “civil standby”. Deputies were then called again to the area for two suspects standing in the street swearing obscenities at the homeowner.
“The two were told numerous times to get out of the street and leave the area,” Cole said. “Both refused and started swearing at deputies while making obscene gestures. Both were eventually arrested and lodged.”

Let's review what these Manistee youngsters did.  They were standing in the public street, not blocking traffic, that's okay with the law.  They were reportedly yelling obscenities at a homeowner from the street at 9:30 PM, rude perhaps, but okay with the law.  When asked to leave the area and get out of the street by the police who had no lawful authority to make such demands, they stayed (Note: there are no public sidewalks), that's okay with the law.  When the youths started cussing and making 'obscene gestures' at the deputies, there had been a breakdown in decorum, but nothing that wasn't within the law.

Being a disorderly person can not be used as a catch-all for police to lock somebody up who swears at them or one who gives them the 'middle finger', they need definite 'disorderly' behavior, none of which is alleged here.  This is established law, sure to be upheld in any reasonable court outside of Mason County.  

A West Michigan case Greene v. Barber (6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 2002) illustrates this nicely.  Anthony Greene went to the Grand Rapids police department to get his car, which had been towed. When a lieutenant answered Greene’s questions about storage fees in a way Greene considered to be arrogant, Greene told the lieutenant, “You know, you’re really being [an] asshole.” When the lieutenant said, “You can’t talk to me like that in my building,” Greene replied, “Well, if that’s how you feel, you’re really stupid.” Then came pepper spray and handcuffs.  The court determined, while “Mr. Greene’s remarks were unflattering to Lt. Barber,” they “clearly gave Barber no license to abridge Greene’s freedom to speak as he did.”

As for rude gestures, these have also been held up, and subsequently upheld, in many states, including Kansas, where, in 1997, a federal court determined in a civil suit that no crime was committed when a man drove by a highway patrol officer – parked in his patrol car, monitoring the speed of passing vehicles – and “flipped the bird” to the trooper. “As irritating or insulting as the man's conduct may have been,” the court wrote, “government officials may not exercise their authority for personal motives, particularly in response to real or perceived slights to their dignity.”

The real crime that was committed in this particular case was that of unlawful imprisonment by the deputies.  The only bit of reprehensible conduct was performed by those same deputies by ignoring their oath to defend the Constitution of Michigan and the USA, which expressly prohibits arresting people when no crime has been committed. 

Should people swear, 'flip the bird', or be disrespectful to law enforcement officers?  Definitely not, but constantly seeing Mason County deputies act stupidly, arrogantly, and totally against the law like they reportedly did in this situation sure gives one plenty of reason why.  This latest outrage should net these Manistee men some big money should they fight these assholes.

[Freedom Seeker]

Sorry but I don't understand what the MCSO should have done.  What would Andy Taylor have done?  Is it not disorderly conduct to holler obscenities in the street?  It wasn't quiet time yet (what 10 p. m.? But I'm sure these kids were loud and disturbing someone's peace).  There must be some infraction for hollering obscenities and then for disobeying officer orders to quit?  Are you saying that the officers must cite the specific infraction  by number and not just label it just as disorderly conduct?

[XLFD]

I'm saying that disorderly conduct was not applicable in this case with the given data. Disturbing the peace (as stump mentions below) is potentially applicable, depending on the extent of the behavior, but even that requires citizens otherwise peaceably and lawfully assembled on a public forum or street; Fountain or its township may have stronger definitions in their local ordinances to address the issue.

Given the factors presented and alleged, it seems the proper course to de-escalate the situation would have been to warn these youths that their behavior was an "unconsented contact" (presuming it was) with the homeowner and that they needed to disperse and refrain from their harassing conduct against them or face potential stalking charges. 

It appears that the deputies only invented the 'disorderly conduct' charge to strongarm the sassy youths after the swearing and gestures hurt the deputies' feelings and threatened their self-perceived authority.  It's clear to me that doing so is having State agents improperly violating free speech rights of the brats, and that the deputies are ignorant and arrogant for their actions.  I would like to see the video of the encounter, for it would likely show both parties acting stupid, but only one using force on the other.

[Freedom Seeker]

Good explanation, X and thanks, I see better your point. Trouble is that each encounter is quick and hot and maybe some of that was said. Michigan law seems a bit goofy in disorderly conduct definitions with linking intoxication with disturbing the peace. We don't know all of the conversation here and maybe the officers suggested "unconsented contact" or something similar. Most officers probably not trained well enough in every nuance of strangely written Michigan archaic laws. I think it would probably follow as strict legal definitions to lump conduct like this as disturbing the peace rather than disorderly after reading the definitions. Strange definitions. Sure seems like the punks conduct was disorderly.

[stump]

I would think that someone yelling anything outside someones house towards the homeowner or towards themselves would be at least disturbing the piece. If the police did show up as they did and they were told to leave the area and didn't I would think the police gave them a chance and the next step would be arrest.  Whats next , the police leave and it escalates into a shooting by one or the other . Then who would  the blame placed on?  The police didn't do their job. In this case , if stated correctly in the above posting the police did their job correctly.

[AQUAMAN]

I'd be interested in seeing a dashcam video of this event too. But, common sense alone from the report declares these young out of town punks did disturb the peace, and were totally disorderly, and got what they deserved. If nothing was done, I'm quite sure the event would have escalated into something worse in the end. Good job MCSO.

[Hart2003]

What Rotta failed to add in the article is that in the state of Michigan it's illegal to sware in front of women and children, which they were doing. He get a grip they were drunk and disorderly. You have cost the City of Ludington a butt  load of money on ridiculous claims against them and lost multiple times you have decided to move on to the county. GET OVER YOURSELF THE DISORDERLY CHARGE WAS APPLICABLE!! They were in the middle of street acting like idiots.  They should be charged. 

[XLFD]

Hart2003, you are right in saying that swearing in front of women and children used to be a crime, but it hasn't been for four years, it was repealed during the Snyder governorship.  There is nothing in the article referencing any drunkenness, that is very relevant since one was a minor and the actual disorderly statute has a little more latitude if you can show the element of the alleged disorderly people being drunk.  

I am in no way defending the uncivil way the youths are portrayed in this press release, but I take offense that the MCSO would criminalize their rude behavior and deprive them of their liberties just because they allegedly swore and flipped off the deputies.  Do you think it would be proper for you to use force and imprison somebody just because they swore at you and gave you the finger?  Neither should it be proper for those sworn to uphold laws.  

If you are going to characterize my lawsuits, please do some research to see whether the claims were ridiculous and whether I won on my claim(s), either by settlement or by judgment.  You may be surprised. 

[Freedom Seeker]

Hart, you show a butt load of ignorance in your statement.

[stump]

     The city of Ludington councilors are causing the City [ insurance ] the BUTT LOAD OF MONEY for not following the laws of our State. I wish ROTTA got equal monies that the city paid their attorneys. Then maybe they would follow the law. Also maybe the City attorney should be docked instead of paid for cases he [ they ] lose.  I bet things would straighten up then. Maybe the City should have a coarse on OPEN MEETING LAW. Apparently the council / lawyers  don't understand what"s in it or never read anything pertaining to it. Seems they just go along with everything fat dumb and happy hoping Rotta won't catch it and then try to make it Rotta"s fault.

[XLFD]

The Open Meetings Act is very simple law when you consider it's statutory purpose and spirit, which is that the public should be given every opportunity to be involved in the making of public policy in open discussion and decision-making forums.  One of the settlement terms of the latest lawsuit is that all city officials on boards, committees and the council will receive an "official's manual" by year's end which goes over the various laws and rules pertaining to their station.  The hope is that they will be able to do some self-policing of themselves and their behaviors which have given them a bad reputation over the years.

[stump]

Official Manual , thats a great idea. Hopefully maybe at least 1 will read it.

[XLFD]

The expectation is that the official who gets the manual will sign a form that they read and understand the contents, so that if they participate later in some secret squirrel activities in opposition to the law, they will be on record as knowing that it was illegal at the time they participated in it.  It's a great tool for accountability and rule uniformity.   It should be approved by the December 16 meeting.