First Impression on Hamlin Homicide

[XLFD]

You may have heard about an alleged stabbing murder that happened up in Hamlin Township on Wednesday night, if not here's a brief report of it:

MASON COUNTY, Mich., (WPBN/WGTU) -- The Mason County Sheriff’s Office has identified the man accused of killing a 71-year-old man in Hamlin Township.

Nicholas Blough, 35, is now charged with open murder, a felony punishable with life in prison, and assaulting a police officer.

Deputies said they arrived at the home on West Maple Street around 7:30 p.m. Wednesday and found a 71-year-old man (Kenneth Lee Schweitzer) dead.

The suspect, later identified to be Blough, had already fled the scene.

About 15 minutes later, deputies said they found a man matching the description of the suspect in the area of Culver Road and 6th Street.

Upon making contact, Blough fled on foot into a wooded area, deputies said, but was taken into custody after a short pursuit. {END}

The recap and the initial news release by the sheriff, written many hours after the fact, left out some material that was included in many early versions of the story, namely the original reason why Blough was arrested, as still seen in this article:

(MCP):  "Upon making contact, the subject fled on foot into a wooded area. After a short foot pursuit, deputies were able to take the subject into custody. He is described as a 35-year-old Ludington man and is currently lodged at the Mason County Jail on resisting and opposing a police officer charge." 

Other reports updated the incident of the arrest to edit out the original charge of R & O.  It's likely for a good reason.  The only open interview with the sheriff's office was done by local radio station WMOM, where Undersheriff Derek Wilson dances around divulging too much information, especially when it comes to the topic of the resisting and obstruction charge he is asked of at about 3:10 into the interview:

WMOM:  "The second charge that he is being arraigned on is assaulting resisting and obstructing a police officer is there anything in regards to that chase that happened afterwards?"

Undersheriff Wilson:  "That was the original charge he was arrested on.  When the officers tried to stop him, that's when he fled on foot, allegedly.  And they took him into custody for the R & O charge."  

WMOM:  "Was he easy to capture when you saw him or was there-- that obstruction-- difficulty, trying to take him into custody?"

Wilson:  "I can't speak to that."

It's troubling enough that there is a man dead, it's troubling enough that a man appears to have repeatedly stabbed him, it's troubling enough that the undersheriff won't relay whether a third party made the original 911 call, but perhaps the most troublesome part to this incident so far is that the sheriff's office is not relaying to the public about why the suspect is being charged with R & O.  

Just walking away from, or even running away from police, is not generally a crime without some other factors coming into play.  The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects citizens from unlawful search and seizure of property, and allows a person to go about his business or remain silent during an investigatory police stop.

Under Michigan law, MCL 750.81d, an individual who “resists, obstructs or opposes” a police officer who is performing his duties is guilty of a felony punishable by up to two years in prison. The statute does not define the terms “resist” or “oppose” but the term “obstruct” is defined to include “the use or threatened use of physical interference or force or a knowing failure to comply with a lawful command.”

Thus, if Mr. Blough was walking and started running away when he saw the deputy's vehicle before he was eventually chased down, he could not be charged with obstruction if he was not given a lawful command.  Such a command may have never been issued, as Blough matched the suspect's description, he was in the general area, and he ran as if he was guilty.  

Deputies seem to have enough reasonable suspicion to have detained Blough, but in the course of a frenetic chase, were they able to give a lawful command to relay that information to the suspect before they stopped him?  If not, the obstruction charge seems inapplicable, which is why the undersheriff's inability to speak about it, when there is no reason why it should not be publicly known, is an indication that the charge is inappropriate. 

One would think a murder charge would be sufficient.  Incidents like these are when bodycams show their importance, not only in protecting deputies from potentially false charges claimed by those they arrest, but also by protecting the rights of those arrested.