Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

From a moral standpoint, the three men weren’t wrong. Legally, there seems to be a problem that Nate the Lawyer hints at but doesn’t say directly:

The heart of the defense’s case is that the three men were trying to detain Aubery for a citizen’s arrest until the police came. Now, I don’t know how the law is in Georgia or wherever Aubery was doing his shit, but in NYC, if I’m not mistaken, in order to detain someone you have to witness the crime yourself and the crime has to be at least a misdemeanor. They don’t witness him doing anything but running. They didn’t see him in that house. I forget if someone even informed them that the man was on a property, but even if they did, I am still pretty sure that they would have to witness the crime themselves in order to detain him or else it is unlawful imprisonment. Can someone more knowledgeable than me (lawyer, paralegal, resident of that state) confirm or deny? If that is the case, those three men are fucked because they would have had no legal right to engage the man.

From a moral standpoint, the three men weren’t wrong. Legally, there seems to be a problem that Nate the Lawyer hints at but doesn’t say directly: The heart of the defense’s case is that the three men were trying to detain Aubery for a citizen’s arrest until the police came. Now, I don’t know how the law is in Georgia or wherever Aubery was doing his shit, but in NYC, if I’m not mistaken, in order to detain someone you have to witness the crime yourself and the crime has to be at least a misdemeanor. They don’t witness him doing anything but running. They didn’t see him in that house. I forget if someone even informed them that the man was on a property, but even if they did, I am still pretty sure that they would have to witness the crime themselves in order to detain him or else it is unlawful imprisonment. Can someone more knowledgeable than me (lawyer, paralegal, resident of that state) confirm or deny? If that is the case, those three men are fucked because they would have had no legal right to engage the man.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (71).
[–] • 4 pts

They didn’t see him in that house.

Didn't they spot him coming out of that house?

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

If they saw him exit the house, but he has not forced his way in or gained entry through inconventional means, then it is not a burglary. If he enters conventionally and then leaves the site without breaking and entering, but has items, it is either petty larceny or grand larceny. If he just walks out with nothing in hand, then that may be a criminal trespass, but in most jurisdictions, you would need prominent anti-trespassing signage believe it or not. That is how a a couple of these stupid police auditors get to walk around wherever they want and evade arrest.

[–] • 4 pts

IIRC the house was in construction/renovation and no one lived there.

The jogger went in to try and grab some tools he could resell for cash.

That wasn't the first time the neighborhood was visited by joggers.

[–] • 1 pt

Yes, I know all of that, but if I'm correct they had to personally witness him committing a crime. You can't snatch people up off of hearsay.

[–] • 0 pt

If they saw him exit the house, but he has not forced his way in or gained entry through inconventional means, then it is not a burglary

It would be trespassing.

[–] • 0 pt

Most likely, but not a guarantee since it is not an occupied domicile and may not have had signage prominently posted. I'm pretty sure it would be different if it were an occupied home with people residing in it.