News
Politics, Current Events, and Serious Discussion
Share
Stats
Verdict In The Othal Wallace Trial
So when does freedom become detainment during an illegal search or stop? You never have to comply to an illegal search and seizure. This should have been ruled self defense! Continue fighting my people. That officer lost his life because of what he did, not the other way around! #OthalWallace #B1
www.wesh.com
Othal Wallace convicted of manslaughter in shooting of Daytona Beach officer
A jury has returned a verdict for Othal Wallace, the man accused of killing Daytona Beach Police Officer Jason Raynor in 2021.
www.wesh.com D
Deleted member 1946
Guest
I hate it when we defend ourselves and we are still looked at as the perpetrators. We need real power like the Jews have.So when does freedom become detainment during an illegal search or stop? You never have to comply to an illegal search and seizure. This should have been ruled self defense! Continue fighting my people. That officer lost his life because of what he did, not the other way around! #OthalWallace #B1
Othal Wallace convicted of manslaughter in shooting of Daytona Beach officer
A jury has returned a verdict for Othal Wallace, the man accused of killing Daytona Beach Police Officer Jason Raynor in 2021.
- Messages
- 1,011
- Reputation
- 1,371
- Location
- San Antonio, TX
- zBucks
- 9,261
- Sex
- Male
- Race
- Black
- Origin
- USA
The main thing is that the police officer was acting illegally. At no time prior to the officer arriving by his vehicle did Othal break any law. He wasn't driving and then get pulled over. He was just sitting in his car about to get out and go inside.
The officer had no reason to approach him. Due to this that means that the officer's actions were not legal. As such Othal had no obligation/requirement to comply with any of his commands.
The officer approaching him was not lawful. The officer blocking touching him was assault (crime). The officer blocking him from leaving the car was false arrest/kidnap (crime). Othal asked "What was going on?" At no point did the officer answer or notify him he was detained or under arrest. As such Othal was completely within his rights to leave his vehicle and go into the apartments. The officer putting hands on him to stop him was an escalation on the part of the officer and unwarranted. At no point did the officer inform Othal he was looking for stolen vehicle and he suspected his vehicle was stolen. Nor did he inform him he was suspected of any crime.
Othal had no obligation to answer any of the questions. The right to remain silent begins as soon as an officer approaches you. Even if he were pulled over he is only obligated to give his license, insurance and registration. He doesn't have to answer any other questions. Where are you going? Do you have drugs or weapons? Do you have any warrants? You aren't required to answer any of these types of questions.
Once the officer began to assault him he was within his rights to resist the assault. You can resist assault by a police officer just as you would any other person. The exception is if they are arresting you in which case you can't resist the arrest unless it is a false/illegal arrest. Even then it's not wise to resist though because the officer can always try to argue he was acting in good faith.
This wasn't the case here. The officer never said he was under arrest or detained, He just walked up and started asking questions and giving commands.
A police officer can't just walk up to a citizen and start giving commands. If you are in a public park and breaking no laws then a cop can't just walk up and say lay down on the ground for no reason and you have to comply. Police can't just tell us what to do unless there is some legal justification.
Not let's say there is an active shooter and the police are trying to clear the building. An officer tells you to exit through the door on the left. That is a justifiable order and has a reasonable rationale behind it. You could ignore it and exit on the right but then if the shooter is there and kills you then the officer isn't responsible.
In this case there is no rationale to tell Othal to sit down and stay in his car. The officer had zero reason to approach and give any type of order to this man.
Being that the officer was acting in a completely illegal manner Othal was justified to use force and the minute he thought the officer was going for a gun. He can use the same argument that police always use. "I was in fear for my life" and as such he is justified to use deadly force.
The prosecutor tried to argue he could have just complied. That's true but he had no legal obligation to do so. He could choose to comply or he could choose to not comply and if his choice was to not comply then the police officer can't use force to make him do so.
The police can use force to defend himself or someone else. (didn't apply)
The police can use force to enact an arrest (didn't apply as he wasn't under arrest)
The police can use force to stop a fugitive suspected of a felony or person that may be a danger to the public from escaping (didn't apply because he never said he suspected him of a crime)
The police can't just walk up tell you to do something for no reason, refuse to tell you why they are giving the command and then beat you if you don't follow said command. That's what the prosecution if trying to argue which is just crazy.
That's my understanding of the law.
Now all of that said. Best bet is going to be to try to just comply if you can because we live in AmeriKKKa (don't get sh*t twisted). And even if you are completely within you legal rights not to comply the system of white supremacy doesn't care. They just care that you are black.
The officer had no reason to approach him. Due to this that means that the officer's actions were not legal. As such Othal had no obligation/requirement to comply with any of his commands.
The officer approaching him was not lawful. The officer blocking touching him was assault (crime). The officer blocking him from leaving the car was false arrest/kidnap (crime). Othal asked "What was going on?" At no point did the officer answer or notify him he was detained or under arrest. As such Othal was completely within his rights to leave his vehicle and go into the apartments. The officer putting hands on him to stop him was an escalation on the part of the officer and unwarranted. At no point did the officer inform Othal he was looking for stolen vehicle and he suspected his vehicle was stolen. Nor did he inform him he was suspected of any crime.
Othal had no obligation to answer any of the questions. The right to remain silent begins as soon as an officer approaches you. Even if he were pulled over he is only obligated to give his license, insurance and registration. He doesn't have to answer any other questions. Where are you going? Do you have drugs or weapons? Do you have any warrants? You aren't required to answer any of these types of questions.
Once the officer began to assault him he was within his rights to resist the assault. You can resist assault by a police officer just as you would any other person. The exception is if they are arresting you in which case you can't resist the arrest unless it is a false/illegal arrest. Even then it's not wise to resist though because the officer can always try to argue he was acting in good faith.
This wasn't the case here. The officer never said he was under arrest or detained, He just walked up and started asking questions and giving commands.
A police officer can't just walk up to a citizen and start giving commands. If you are in a public park and breaking no laws then a cop can't just walk up and say lay down on the ground for no reason and you have to comply. Police can't just tell us what to do unless there is some legal justification.
Not let's say there is an active shooter and the police are trying to clear the building. An officer tells you to exit through the door on the left. That is a justifiable order and has a reasonable rationale behind it. You could ignore it and exit on the right but then if the shooter is there and kills you then the officer isn't responsible.
In this case there is no rationale to tell Othal to sit down and stay in his car. The officer had zero reason to approach and give any type of order to this man.
Being that the officer was acting in a completely illegal manner Othal was justified to use force and the minute he thought the officer was going for a gun. He can use the same argument that police always use. "I was in fear for my life" and as such he is justified to use deadly force.
The prosecutor tried to argue he could have just complied. That's true but he had no legal obligation to do so. He could choose to comply or he could choose to not comply and if his choice was to not comply then the police officer can't use force to make him do so.
The police can use force to defend himself or someone else. (didn't apply)
The police can use force to enact an arrest (didn't apply as he wasn't under arrest)
The police can use force to stop a fugitive suspected of a felony or person that may be a danger to the public from escaping (didn't apply because he never said he suspected him of a crime)
The police can't just walk up tell you to do something for no reason, refuse to tell you why they are giving the command and then beat you if you don't follow said command. That's what the prosecution if trying to argue which is just crazy.
That's my understanding of the law.
Now all of that said. Best bet is going to be to try to just comply if you can because we live in AmeriKKKa (don't get sh*t twisted). And even if you are completely within you legal rights not to comply the system of white supremacy doesn't care. They just care that you are black.