Posted on 03/19/2014 3:45:32 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA
BRIDGEPORT TWP, Mich. (March 18, 2014)– A man in Saginaw County is facing a felony charge after being arrested at a township board meeting March 4, for going over his allotted speaking time.
Mark Adams was charged Friday, March 14 with a felony resisting and obstructing police and a disturbing the peace misdemeanor.
The incident was caught on camera and has been viewed thousands of times.
FOX 17 spoke exclusively with the man arrested, traveling across the state to get answers.
Adams was pulled from the podium by several officers and arrested after exceeding the public comment time limit of three minutes, addressing several issues he has with his local government.
(Excerpt) Read more at fox17online.com ...
The same holds true law enforcement wise. The "We got to get tough with these criminals" has evolved to the point that, in the view of the police, there are now two classes of criminals: Those we have caught and those we haven't caught yet.
We have much different opinions about what constitutes “resisting arrest” then.
I saw none of that.
I saw a guy onto whom pounced law enforcement. He did turn to sit down, he didn’t in my opinion resist arrest.
I hope this charge is thrown out. Sure arrest him for exceeding the time limit, but a felony arrest for resisting arrest is wildly over the top.
I am very disappointed.
In a tyranny, everyone is a criminal, except the government or anyone who works for the government or is part of the government.
The Founding Fathers didn't envision a country where the peasants are charged with felony "resisting" for not IMMEDIATELY groveling before Farce Enlawment Orifices.
A felony is where you go to a Blue Donut Blimp's house afterwards and "explain" things to him. I would qualify that as a felony.
In a tyranny, everyone is a criminal, except the government or anyone who works for the government or is part of the government.
In fact, why can’t a citizen filibuster a city council? They pass some of the stupidest sh!t imaginable, and there is no recourse most of the time.
To answer my own question, the watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) would use this to stop commerce everywhere.
Many FReepers are still big Law and Order types, but what I took away from the experience is that there are two kinds of law in America:
Peasant law and Royal law.
This post is a great example of "peasant law". The Royal Blue-clad enforcers sail in, and invent a charge so they can abduct the guy under color of "law". Then, he "resists" (by way of the fat bacon Blimps chanting "The Magic Words"), so they can get him with a "peasant felony".
A couple of examples of "Royal law":
Bill Clinton commit perjury in the face of a federal judge. No worries, mate!
Jon Corzine steals a couple of billion dollars. He's connected. Again, no worries!
Meanwhile, on Free Republic, Law and Order guy Mr Ramsbotham "thinks" that peasant Mark Adams "felony resisted".
Lore and Ordure, Merkun style...
Oh, bullfeathers! I watched it and there was no resistance on his part. This is a trumped up charge.
The police constantly saying "Stop Resisting!" does not constitute actual resisting. It is a phrase police are trained to automatically say so when they appear in court two months later, that is what witnesses remember. In this case, it has nothing to do with the actions of the man they arrested. He was peacefully complying.
This is disgraceful. Tyranny, actually.
What's next - saying "Stop Resisting!" and then saying using a bully club to knock the arrested unconscious is "justifiable force"? That is the next step in this shameful process.
This is a worth a felony charge? I call it bullshit!!
Maybe the peasants need a counter-phrase to chant:
"Stop abducting!" or "Stop kidnapping!"
The Fat Blue Bacon Slabs already do this...
The Blue Donut Blimps recently beat some deaf guy unconscious for attempting to use sign language to tell them he couldn't hear their "lawful ordures".
They also recently beat a guy to death for refusing to show his ID.
And last but not least, Ted Kennedy abandoning the girl in his car to drown. Him being royalty, was that wrong or criminal of him? The people [voters] of Massachusetts did not believe so. Should you or I have did the same thing, these same people would have lined up and, torn their garments and screamed, "Off to prison with them".
It is not what you do, it is who you are today.
Dems in Philly PA get of the hook of corruption because they are black.
This poor guy is guilty of simply wanting to present his case, and he is whisked away.
Absolutely pathetic that anyone believes this is in any way okay.
It makes sense at a community meeting to have a speaking policy in effect that places time limits on unscheduled speeches.
Along with that, it also should be required to allow citizens to schedule presentations ahead of time so that they have more time to adequately present a more complicated subject.
Just my opinion, but having been a part of community meetings, there is a problem with run-on meetings that last well into the night, AND there's a problem with speakers who can't get to the point or who have mindless things to say.
If there were 100 people waiting to speak, I could see the issue. If not, what is the problem with allowing say 4 minutes instead of 3?
To me it wouldn’t be, but some folks stick to their policies so they don’t have to deal with complaints.
If this township doesn’t have a way for a presenter to get on the agenda with his full presentation, then they are wrong. Even those, though, have to have time limits. I’d think 15 minutes would be enough for most subjects, and especially if they can use handouts and slides.
If there’s no way to get on the official agenda, then this guy had a legitimate gripe and a good reason for violating their 3 minute rule.
I think the felony was resisting, not speaking.
I grew up about 90 minutes from that area just north of Roscommon. Once you get north of Bay City/Midland, it's all country. I loved it up there.
Why not 2 hours? I agree but where are you going to set the limit?
Where exactly is the guy supposed to go if he has issues concerning his property?
I've run meetings before, and there's a reason to the comment limit time. People need to be allowed to have their say, but at the time time can't filibuster the meeting. Policies don't get solved in public comment. You also have to apply the policy equally to all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.