Georgia Sheriff accidently tells truth

Go to the atlanta journal at www.ajc.com and register and go under metro section (todays paper, january 31,2006). The fayette county sheriff refused to take a prisoner arrested by a county marshall because the sheriff said the marshall's office is a code enforcement agency without police arrest powers. What he FAILED to mention, but inadvertantly said when he said code enforcement agencies dont have arrest powers, was that police forces apply also in this case. Common law and Constitutional scholars know that only sheriffs have arrest powers as far as as a "force" is concerned. Police are included under the non arrest powers also. now, whats interesting about this case is, i wonder how this sheriff would react NOW if confronted with the fact that city commissioners cannot put together a standing army under color of law enforcing code violations and call them police. interesting article.

[fulltitle]

Originally Posted by kgod999

Go to the atlanta journal at www.ajc.com and register and go under metro section (todays paper, january 31,2006). The fayette county sheriff refused to take a prisoner arrested by a county marshall because the sheriff said the marshall's office is a code enforcement agency without police arrest powers. What he FAILED to mention, but inadvertantly said when he said code enforcement agencies dont have arrest powers, was that police forces apply also in this case. Common law and Constitutional scholars know that only sheriffs have arrest powers as far as as a "force" is concerned. Police are included under the non arrest powers also. now, whats interesting about this case is, i wonder how this sheriff would react NOW if confronted with the fact that city commissioners cannot put together a standing army under color of law enforcing code violations and call them police. interesting article.

WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Its not unsual to find arguments between sheriffs, marshalls and/or police over issues pertaining to traffic tickets. Marshalls are enforcers of judicial orders (standing or otherwise)--they have no business in many jurisdictions doing anything else whatsoever. Sheriffs are 'allegedly' the only law enforcement authority in a shire/county/parish. Sheriffs in Georgia may, for example, specifically tasked to respond to domestic violence related issues, murders, burial of the dead and so on. But if you even look on line you could find sights arguments and conflicts between sheriffs, police and marshalls.


POLICE
Police are legislative policy enforces. State police go with the state legislature. Some City Police may be quietly state police (i.e. the Metroplitan Police of the City of X might secretly be under the state legislature with only 'pretend' control of the City of X board/council). Perhaps keep in mind that the military authority (imperium) in the Roman view may be said to come from the people and/or the legislative bodies.

[Police unforms tend to be blue and/or black.]


SHERIFF
Sheriffs are allegedly 'law' enforcers but they also may carry out the duties similar to marshalls such as evicitions dictated by statute. The trend in the American system has been to diminish the role of sheriffs.

[Sheriffs uniforms might tend to be brown with white/gold.]


CORONER
In the American systemm the 'coroner' appears to be a vanishing role. The coroner was tasked to look investigate into things for the sovereign and to look after the sovereign's treasure trove. Would crooks, thieves and devours of widows' houses, if any, want a coroner around watching the pot of gold?


MARSHALLS
To my knowledge, marshalls tend to be tasked with enforcing orders of courts and defend 'court personnel'. You might find a marshal handling a court-ordered eviction or enforcing an arrest warrant.

[idknow]

Originally Posted by kgod999

Go to the atlanta journal at www.ajc.com and register and go under metro section (todays paper, january 31,2006). The fayette county sheriff refused to take a prisoner arrested by a county marshall because the sheriff said the marshall's office is a code enforcement agency without police arrest powers. What he FAILED to mention, but inadvertantly said when he said code enforcement agencies dont have arrest powers, was that police forces apply also in this case. Common law and Constitutional scholars know that only sheriffs have arrest powers as far as as a "force" is concerned. Police are included under the non arrest powers also. now, whats interesting about this case is, i wonder how this sheriff would react NOW if confronted with the fact that city commissioners cannot put together a standing army under color of law enforcing code violations and call them police. interesting article.

Would you copy/summarise the article for us here who are truly unable to register? namely me (grin)
heh

[weishaupt1776]

Yeah, KG, please clip it and paste it

[mikah2k]

....................

[idknow]

Originally Posted by mikah2k

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/met...tmarshals.html

thanks, got it.

fascinating.

an sworm of people to eat out our substance that continues to grow by leaps and bounds.

[charlesa6]

Originally Posted by mikah2k

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/met...tmarshals.html

Your link required user registration.

[test]

Sometimes this site can help with the registration thing:

http://bugmenot.com/

[Logan]

Here in my corporate color of law STATE, the legislature has given power to all authorized agents of the commissioner to submit written complaints for the purposes of prosecution pursuant to 32:398.4.


32:395. Police officers not impeded by this chapter
Except as otherwise provided by law or by this Chapter, authorized agents of the commissioner shall not be impeded from exercising the functions of their office or performing their duties in the enforcement of this Chapter, the regulations of the department or of the commissioner adopted pursuant hereto, or any other law of this state within the scope of their authority upon any highway, whether or not the highway is located in whole or in part within the corporate limits of any incorporated municipality of whatsoever population or within any parish of this state. However, in doing so, they shall observe the traffic and police regulations of such municipalities and parishes and, whatever practicably possible, shall cooperate with the police departments of such municipalities or parish officials who shall aid and assist them in the enforcement of this Chapter


32:391. Appearance upon arrest
A. Whenever any person is arrested for a violation of any provision of this Chapter or any regulation of the department or of the secretary of the Department of Public Safety adopted pursuant thereto, except as otherwise provided in this Section, the arresting officer shall take his name, address, the license number of his motor vehicle, and the number of his operator's license, and shall issue a summons or otherwise notify him in writing to appear at a time and place to be specified in such summons and notice. The time shall be at least five days after arrest, unless the person arrested demands an earlier hearing. If the person arrested demands an earlier hearing, he shall have a right to an immediate hearing or a hearing within twenty-four hours, at a convenient hour, to be before a magistrate within the parish where the offense was committed. Except as otherwise provided in this Section, the person arrested shall have the option of remaining in custody pending his furnishing bail as fixed by a magistrate or depositing his operator's license with the arresting officer, as provided in R.S. 32:411.
B. If the person arrested holds a Louisiana operator's license and gives his written promise to appear at the time and place stated, the officer may release him from custody or take him immediately before a magistrate, but shall not require the person arrested to deposit his operator's license. Any such person refusing to give the written promise to appear shall be taken immediately by the arresting officer before the nearest or most accessible magistrate having jurisdiction. Any person who willfully violates his written promise to appear shall be punished as provided in R.S. 32:57.1, regardless of the disposition of the charge upon which he was arrested originally. The arresting officer shall fully inform the arrested person of the consequences of failing to honor a written promise to appear pursuant to R.S. 32:57.1.
C. This Section does not apply to any person charged with an offense involving or contributing to an accident resulting in injury or death to any person, or to any person charged with driving while under the influence of intoxicants or narcotics, or to any person whom the arresting officer has good cause to believe has committed any felony or misdemeanor, and in any of these cases the arresting officer shall immediately take the person arrested before the nearest or most accessible magistrate having jurisdiction

I routinely witness marshals in my area in their plain cars with only the round ensignia on the door pull people over and issue them contracts to appear in an administrative hearing to argue and give them revenue. This section gives any commisioned agent the power to collect revenue based upon color of law statute and gives the prosecution the authority to prosecute on ANY complaint submitted. Even if it is from a civilian, i.e. domestic dispute, child support complaint, truancy etc.

32:398.4. When copy of citation shall be deemed a lawful complaint
In the event the citation form provided for in this Part is sworn to and includes the necessary information required under the general laws of this state with respect to a complaint which charges commission of the offense alleged in said citation to have been committed, then such citation, when filed with a court of proper jurisdiction, shall be deemed to be a lawful complaint for the purpose of prosecution under this Part.

And this might apply if one were to attempt to cancel a citation contract within the 72 hour time period following forced signature.

398.3. Illegal cancellation of traffic citation; penalty; audit of citation records; publication
A. Any person who cancels or solicits the cancellation of any traffic citation, in any manner other than as provided in this Part, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned for not more than six months or both.
B. Each record of traffic citations required in this Part shall be audited quarterly by the appropriate fiscal officer of the governmental agency to which the traffic enforcement agency is responsible.

Wake up folks, we live in a POLICE STATE and we are all just a means to a corrupt power play end. Even if you were once friends with an officer of the court, he will not hesitate to exploit you and use you for the purposes of subjegation which his training, and his superiors have taught him. It has been my experience that most officers of the court are only accepting of such a dangerous and low paying occupation because they are almost ALL compensating for some personal shortcoming which their elevated sense of power helps them to overcome.

[weishaupt1776]

By KEVIN DUFFY
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 01/31/06

On a December night in 2003, Fayette County Marshal Mark Thayer saw a Ford Escort with no brake lights run a red light in Fayetteville.

Thayer pulled the car over, smelled alcohol and learned the driver had a suspended license. He administered a breath test and arrested the middle-aged woman.








She was taken to the Fayetteville Police Department, videotaped taking another breath test, and then driven to the Fayette County Jail.

But at the jail, the prisoner was turned away. The reason: Sheriff Randall Johnson, who runs the jail, says the Marshal's Office is a code enforcement agency, not a police force with arrest powers.

In his report, Thayer said the jailer told him if the Fayetteville police had made the arrest, the woman would have been locked up. Instead, a relative picked her up.

The incident ignited a legal battle that landed Monday at the Georgia Supreme Court, where Johnson is appealing superior court rulings after the county sued the sheriff over the jail incident.

"Out of the clear blue sky one day he said I'm not going to do this anymore," County Commission Chairman Greg Dunn said recently. "This marshal was stuck with this woman. What was he going to do with her? It was totally inappropriate what he did." Dunn and Johnson attended Monday's hearing.

The Fayette County Commission created the Marshal's Office in 1983 and six years later passed a resolution giving it police powers, including the power to arrest.

But the sheriff's attorney, Charles Byrd, argued Monday the marshals were not doing police work before state law was changed in 1992 requiring voter approval to create a police force.

"They have no evidence that resolution ever had life breathed into it," Byrd told the seven justices. He wants the state's highest court to reverse Superior Court Judge William Ison's summary judgments. According to Byrd, jurors should decide whether the county had a police force before 1992. If they decide no, voters must approve creating one.

"We want a chance to make our arguments to a jury," Byrd said.

Affidavits from a former county manager, Billy Beckett, and a former county commissioner, Dan Lakly, now a state representative from Peachtree City, claim the marshals were not supposed to be police.

From 1989 through 1991, one marshal made just two arrests and issued two tickets, indicating the Marshal's Office was not operating as a police force, Byrd said.

But Dennis Davenport, attorney for the county, said the jail had accepted marshals' prisoners before the episode in 2003 and that the legality of their arrests before then was never questioned.

He also said Beckett erred in his affidavit when he said marshals had never made felony arrests. As for Lakly's opinion, Davenport said, "one commissioner does not say what the intent of an ordinance is."

The Marshal's Office seldom makes arrests. Rather, the small force primarily enforces county ordinances and keeps an eye on county property.

The Sheriff's Office, a much bigger operation, staffs several courts, operates the jail, conducts criminal investigations, serves warrants, enforces traffic laws and frequently makes arrests.

Both offices are county funded, but the sheriff gets much more money — $13.8 million to $665,812 for the marshals. The sheriff also gets state and federal drug forfeiture funds.

Ed Collins, Fayette's chief marshal, said marshals don't patrol the highways, but if they see a lawbreaker, they must act.

"It's one of those things where you can't let them go," he said.

Johnson, sheriff for 29 years, said giving marshals police powers adds another layer of bureaucracy and wastes tax dollars.

"It's a duplication of services, is what it is," he said Monday after the hearing.

In Georgia, 19 counties and seven cities have marshal's offices, according to the Georgia Peace Officers Standards and Training Council. All 159 counties have sheriff's offices.

Law enforcement officials in Fulton, DeKalb and Cherokee counties, all of which have marshals, were surprised to hear the Fayette jail rejected the marshal's prisoner.

"I've never heard of that," said Sgt. Nikita Hightower of the Fulton Sheriff's Office. In Fulton, she said, marshals sometimes bring in prisoners and it's never a problem.

"They've made several cases and brought them to our jail and we've accepted them," Hightower said.

"If they see someone that is breaking the law — I mean, that's their oath to do something about it."

Kevin Roach, assistant chief marshal in Cherokee, called refusing to take the prisoner in Fayette "ludicrous."

"We're state certified officers," he said. "If it's an arrest it should have been a valid arrest."