Legislation on citizen's arrest

[jacques]

Does anyone know what legislation covers when and how a citizen's arrest can be performed in Trinidad and Tobago?

[KFCSpicy]

Ask Serenity. I think she works in the legal field and is more exposed to that sort of info without bias.

[serenity]

I dont practice criminal law. But from what I remem, a private citizen's power of arrest is not legislated but a common law principle - A private citizen had a power of arrest without warrant where a breach of the peace was committed in the presence of the person making the arrest; where there was a threat of a breach of the peace being renewed; and where,although no breach had been committed, the person making the arrest reasonably and honestly believed that such a breach would be committed in the immediate future.

I am, as always, subject to correction.

[trinisuckz]

its about time!

We are the only ones who can now protect ourselves !

[serenity]

Perhaps this is the wrong thread, but trinisuckz response made me wonder if all of a sudden citizens will be taking up arms where they were hesitant to before. It has always been your responsibility to safeguard yourself. I dont know why, with RLM's announcements about a citizen's right to defend himself, some ppl now seem to feel empowered, as if the only option before was to cower in fear like the little pig waiting for his house of straw to be blown down. This empowerment is false though. What exactly changes if an 2 armed men came to your home and asked u to hand over your money?

[jacques]

Thanks Serenity.

What do we mean by "breach of the peace"? In English law ANY criminal offense technically constitutes a breach of the peace. Is this the case in T&T? In some jurisdictions (say England and Wales) a citizen's arrest can only be carried out for an indictable offence (or a felony in the US). In Canada it can take place both for a indictable offense and a summary offence. Do you know what the case is in Trinidad?

Are there any other conditions attached? In Australia for instance a citizen's arrest is only lawful if proceedings by summons against the other person would not:
- ensure the appearance of the person before a court in respect of the offence;
- prevent a repetition or continuation of the offence or the commission of another offence;
- prevent the concealment, loss or destruction of evidence relating to the offence;
- prevent harassment of, or interference with, a person who may be required to give evidence in proceedings in respect of the offence;
- prevent the fabrication of evidence in respect of the offence;
- or would not preserve the safety or welfare of the person

Also, what if the person arrested is later acquitted in court? For the arrest to be lawful, is it sufficient for the person performing the arrest to have reasonable grounds to believe that a breach of the peace is being committed?

Should you caution the person being arrested? (you have the right to remain silent, etc...) In some jurisdictions you should, in others you would be accused of impersonating a police officer....

Also, what is the standard to be applied in terms of the level of coercion that can be applied during the arrest (in cases of course where the suspect is resisting arrest)? In France for instance you are not criminally responsible for what you do to stop a person committing a crime as long as the means employed are in proportion to the threat. In other words if a person is threatening to use deadly force against others (not necessarily you) you can use deadly force against them... In fact in France it is an offence NOT to intervene if someone else is in immediate danger. Is it the case here?

Finally, to perform a citizen's arrest, do you have to be a citizen (of T&T, or a Commonwealth citizen?) or can an alien perform a citizen's arrest (I'm thinking of hiring Russians for my next vigilante group....)?

The risk is of course that should one perform a citizen's arrest for the wrong offence, or not perform it in due form, the arrest would not be lawful, and then one might end up charged with impersonating police, false imprisonment, kidnapping, or wrongful arrest...

[trinisuckz]

Im just an individual thats FED up of having to rely on an inefficent police service, a Joke of a Minister, and a lethargic PM for protection, its about time people take a stand, stand up for their rights to freedom and to protect their famalies by any means necessary.

Admit it- crime in T&T has reached an ALL time HIGH!, there seems to be no IMMEDIATE solution, in the mean time- what do we do as innocent citizens, do we sit back and await the day until we become a statistic ? or do we do somethign about it when the authorities continue to blame this and that and world crime levels for what is happening??

[serenity]

Wow Jacques, thats a tall order. I'll check it later for u.
I can refer u to 2 cases in the interim. They should be on the net:
Regina v Howell
Albert v Levin

[jacques]

Thanks Serenity.
I'll try to look into those cases.

[serenity]

What do we mean by "breach of the peace"? In English law ANY criminal offense technically constitutes a breach of the peace.
The case law refers to an arrestable offence. So, I assume most summary offences will not qualify.

Are there any other conditions attached?
None that I have read of except that undue force should not be used in the context of the offence.

Also, what if the person arrested is later acquitted in court? For the arrest to be lawful, is it sufficient for the person performing the arrest to have reasonable grounds to believe that a breach of the peace is being committed?
Yes, reasonable rounds for suspicion seems to be sufficient and once that exists, then if the person is later acquitted, there is no repercussion for the arrestor.

Should you caution the person being arrested? (you have the right to remain silent, etc...) In some jurisdictions you should, in others you would be accused of impersonating a police officer....
Havent seen anything on this. I assume though, that the person should be made aware as to the reason behind the arrest and the fact of an arrest.

Also, what is the standard to be applied in terms of the level of coercion that can be applied during the arrest (in cases of course where the suspect is resisting arrest)? In France for instance you are not criminally responsible for what you do to stop a person committing a crime as long as the means employed are in proportion to the threat. In other words if a person is threatening to use deadly force against others (not necessarily you) you can use deadly force against them... In fact in France it is an offence NOT to intervene if someone else is in immediate danger. Is it the case here?
One cannot usually found to be guilty by omission unless u can establish that a duty of care exists.

Finally, to perform a citizen's arrest, do you have to be a citizen (of T&T, or a Commonwealth citizen?) or can an alien perform a citizen's arrest (I'm thinking of hiring Russians for my next vigilante group....)?
The case law refers to private persons so the assumption is, anyone can make an arrest, but remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse so your Russians should know the law they are trying to enforce and not try to arrest someone for an act which is not illegal here.

The risk is of course that should one perform a citizen's arrest for the wrong offence, or not perform it in due form, the arrest would not be lawful, and then one might end up charged with impersonating police, false imprisonment, kidnapping, or wrongful arrest...
I think the actions of the private person are judged by a much lower standard and that provided that there is reasonable cause, one should be safe from civil suits.

Please note that the above responses are mostly speculation on my part based on a general knowlege of the law and the reading of a couple cases. It is not offered as an accurate position of the law and should not be accepted, or acted on, as same. Clarification can be sought from the cases cited in the post below and several texts on the criminal law and procedure (Dana Seetahal has a good one). I do not practice criminal law and my knowlege of same is sketchy.

[jacques]

Thanks Serenity. That's very helpful.

I was joking about the Russians...

[snowbird]

What do we mean by "breach of the peace"? In English law ANY criminal offense technically constitutes a breach of the peace.
The case law refers to an arrestable offence. So, I assume most summary offences will not qualify.

Are there any other conditions attached?
None that I have read of except that undue force should not be used in the context of the offence.

Also, what if the person arrested is later acquitted in court? For the arrest to be lawful, is it sufficient for the person performing the arrest to have reasonable grounds to believe that a breach of the peace is being committed?
Yes, reasonable rounds for suspicion seems to be sufficient and once that exists, then if the person is later acquitted, there is no repercussion for the arrestor.

Should you caution the person being arrested? (you have the right to remain silent, etc...) In some jurisdictions you should, in others you would be accused of impersonating a police officer....
Havent seen anything on this. I assume though, that the person should be made aware as to the reason behind the arrest and the fact of an arrest.

Also, what is the standard to be applied in terms of the level of coercion that can be applied during the arrest (in cases of course where the suspect is resisting arrest)? In France for instance you are not criminally responsible for what you do to stop a person committing a crime as long as the means employed are in proportion to the threat. In other words if a person is threatening to use deadly force against others (not necessarily you) you can use deadly force against them... In fact in France it is an offence NOT to intervene if someone else is in immediate danger. Is it the case here?
One cannot usually found to be guilty by omission unless u can establish that a duty of care exists.

Finally, to perform a citizen's arrest, do you have to be a citizen (of T&T, or a Commonwealth citizen?) or can an alien perform a citizen's arrest (I'm thinking of hiring Russians for my next vigilante group....)?
The case law refers to private persons so the assumption is, anyone can make an arrest, but remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse so your Russians should know the law they are trying to enforce and not try to arrest someone for an act which is not illegal here.

The risk is of course that should one perform a citizen's arrest for the wrong offence, or not perform it in due form, the arrest would not be lawful, and then one might end up charged with impersonating police, false imprisonment, kidnapping, or wrongful arrest...
I think the actions of the private person are judged by a much lower standard and that provided that there is reasonable cause, one should be safe from civil suits.

Please note that the above responses are mostly speculation on my part based on a general knowlege of the law and the reading of a couple cases. It is not offered as an accurate position of the law and should not be accepted, or acted on, as same. Clarification can be sought from the cases cited in the post below and several texts on the criminal law and procedure (Dana Seetahal has a good one). I do not practice criminal law and my knowlege of same is sketchy.

Very interesting information shared by all concerned; on behalf of the 'lay person' (in this case, uninformed of things legal :lol: ) Thank you.

Too bad that Ramesh didn't see fit to make a similar declaration before he started dispensing his now 'infamous advice' :roll:

[serenity]

Thanks Serenity. That's very helpful.

I was joking about the Russians...

As was I. :lol:

[sylvestter]

I dont practice criminal law. But from what I remem, a private citizen's power of arrest is not legislated but a common law principle - A private citizen had a power of arrest without warrant where a breach of the peace was committed in the presence of the person making the arrest; where there was a threat of a breach of the peace being renewed; and where,although no breach had been committed, the person making the arrest reasonably and honestly believed that such a breach would be committed in the immediate future.

I am, as always, subject to correction.isn't it also codified in the summary offences act? i have to check my seetahal...

[serenity]

Syl was right.
It is codified in the Criminal Law Act Chapter 10:04.

Section 3 (2) Any person may arrest without warrant anyone who is, or whom he, with reasonable cause, suspects to be, in the act of committing an arrestable offence.

(3) Where an arrestable offence has been committed, any person may arrest without warrant anyone who is, or whom he, with reasonable cause, suspects to be, guilty of the offence.

Section 4. (1) A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assist*ing in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large.

[dancerboy]

(3) Where an arrestable offence has been committed, any person may arrest without warrant anyone who is, or whom he, with reasonable cause, suspects to be, guilty of the offence.

The law is never simply 'BLACK AND WHITE'. The above clause will give rise to so many law suits, there will not be enough courts in the land to adjudicate them. And with a good defence attorney like me, i will win most of those cases. YOU ONLY NEED ONE CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY.

DANCERBOY

[serenity]

I must say, its interesting that the private citizen has the discretion to arrest someone he suspects is in the act of committing an offence, or has committed an offence but not someone that he reasonably suspects is about to commit an offense. It seems that only a police officer have the power to arrest in the latter case.

Here's the link: http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/Laws/Chs ... 4.htm#sec3 (http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/Laws/Chs.%2010-13/10.04/10.04.htm#sec3)

It also says what an arrestable offense is.