They Protested at a Police Station. They’re Charged With Trying to Kidnap Cops.

[ZiprHead]

An “occupation”-style protest over the killing of a Black man in Colorado sparked huge charges—and a whirlwind of wild allegations.

The July 3 protest in Aurora, Colorado, seemed, at least on the surface, like just another of the hundreds of racial justice protests that have swept the nation this year. Demonstrators sat outside a police station chanting and playing music. Although they said they wouldn’t leave until their demands were met, the protesters were cleared out by police around 4:30 a.m.

But several of the protest leaders are facing felony attempted kidnapping charges for allegedly imprisoning police officers in their own precinct during the protest—charges their fellow activists are calling absurd.

Lillian House, Joel Northam, and Whitney “Eliza” Lucero are among a group of Denver-area activists facing a slate of charges related to their protest activities this summer. Local prosecutors say the activists tried to kidnap police by holding a short-lived “occupation”-style protest outside the precinct and blocking its doors. But activists allege a crackdown on the most visible members of their movement, leading to terrifying SWAT arrests and the threat of years in prison.

“This characterization that someone quote-unquote kidnapped officers is absolutely ridiculous,” Ryan Hamby, an organizer with the Party for Socialism and Liberation, the Marxist group with which House, Northam, and Lucero are affiliated, told The Daily Beast.

“It would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious,” he added.

 

[Derec]

The July 3 protest in Aurora, Colorado, seemed, at least on the surface, like just another of the hundreds of racial justice protests that have swept the nation this year. Demonstrators sat outside a police station chanting and playing music. Although they said they wouldn’t leave until their demands were met, the protesters were cleared out by police around 4:30 a.m.
But several of the protest leaders are facing felony attempted kidnapping charges for allegedly imprisoning police officers in their own precinct during the protest—charges their fellow activists are calling absurd.

Zipr, do you think extremists should be allowed to occupy a police station and physically prevent police officers from exiting? If they violated the criminal law, why should they not be prosecuted?

Lillian House, Joel Northam, and Whitney “Eliza” Lucero are among a group of Denver-area activists facing a slate of charges related to their protest activities this summer. Local prosecutors say the activists tried to kidnap police by holding a short-lived “occupation”-style protest outside the precinct and blocking its doors. But activists allege a crackdown on the most visible members of their movement, leading to terrifying SWAT arrests and the threat of years in prison.

“This characterization that someone quote-unquote kidnapped officers is absolutely ridiculous,” Ryan Hamby, an organizer with the Party for Socialism and Liberation, the Marxist group with which House, Northam, and Lucero are affiliated, told The Daily Beast.

Explains a lot, I guess.

Zipr, do you think this behavior should not be illegal? Or that we should excuse and ignore criminal behavior against police as long as it is committed by left-wing extremists?
This is what these commies have allegedly done:

On July 3rd, approximately 600 protesters surrounded the Aurora Police Department’s District
One Police Station located at 13347 E. Montview Boulevard in what was described by protest
organizers on social media as an “occupation.” They blockaded streets surrounding District One with
vehicles and various items from nearby construction sites. They prevented 18 officers inside from
leaving the building by barricading entrances and securing doors with wires, ropes, boards, picnic
tables and sandbags. Some members of the group carried handguns and rifles and wore military or
tactical clothing.

What is the purpose of your thread?

 

[ZiprHead]

Wut, the cop shop doesn't have a back door?

 

[Derec]

Wut, the cop shop doesn't have a back door?

You don't these commies could not have barricaded both doors?
And whether or not they did, do you really think behavior like this should not be criminally prosecuted?

 

[Patooka]

Wut, the cop shop doesn't have a back door?

You don't these commies could not have barricaded both doors?
And whether or not they did, do you really think behavior like this should not be criminally prosecuted?

Do you think this was kidnapping? You don't think that isn't Police overreach, which you know, is what everybody is fucking protesting about? Give me a fucking break.

 

[Arctish]

Wut, the cop shop doesn't have a back door?

You don't these commies could not have barricaded both doors?
And whether or not they did, do you really think behavior like this should not be criminally prosecuted?

Is there evidence the doors were barricaded?

Or are we supposed to believe the cops were cowering inside their station, terrified that if they stepped outside they'd be abducted by Commies?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Wut, the cop shop doesn't have a back door?

You don't these commies could not have barricaded both doors?
And whether or not they did, do you really think behavior like this should not be criminally prosecuted?

Is there evidence the doors were barricaded?

Or are we supposed to believe the cops were cowering inside their station, terrified that if they stepped outside they'd be abducted by Commies?

Doesn't matter--you keep someone from leaving in safety, you're guilty of kidnapping. Doesn't matter if you have the superior firepower. I think it's a lesser offense if you simply confine them to where they freely were, though.

 

[laughing dog]

I thought kidnapping required abducting or transporting someone and holding them against their will. In my view, these protesters accomplished the latter, but not the former.

 

[Arctish]

I thought kidnapping required abducting or transporting someone and holding them against their will. In my view, these protesters accomplished the latter, but not the former.

I thought arresting someone for kidnapping required evidence of an actual plot or attempt to kidnap someone, and that the person being arrested knew about it.

 

[ZiprHead]

I thought kidnapping required abducting or transporting someone and holding them against their will. In my view, these protesters accomplished the latter, but not the former.

I thought arresting someone for kidnapping required evidence of an actual plot or attempt to kidnap someone, and that the person being arrested knew about it.

(1) Any person who does any of the following acts with the intent thereby to force the victim or any other person to make any concession or give up anything of value in order to secure a release of a person under the offender's actual or apparent control commits first degree kidnapping:

(a) Forcibly seizes and carries any person from one place to another;  or

(b) Entices or persuades any person to go from one place to another;  or

(c) Imprisons or forcibly secretes any person.

https://codes.findlaw.com/co/title-18-criminal-code/co-rev-st-sect-18-3-301.html

(1) Any person who knowingly seizes and carries any person from one place to another, without his consent and without lawful justification, commits second degree kidnapping.

(2) Any person who takes, entices, or decoys away any child not his own under the age of eighteen years with intent to keep or conceal the child from his parent or guardian or with intent to sell, trade, or barter such child for consideration commits second degree kidnapping.

(3) Second degree kidnapping is a class 2 felony if any of the following circumstances exist:

(a) The person kidnapped is a victim of a sexual offense pursuant to part 4 of this article;  or

(b) The person kidnapped is a victim of a robbery.

(4)(a) Unless it is a class 2 felony under subsection (3) of this section, second degree kidnapping is a class 3 felony if any of the following circumstances exist:

(I) The kidnapping is accomplished with intent to sell, trade, or barter the victim for consideration;  or

(II) The kidnapping is accomplished by the use of a deadly weapon or any article used or fashioned in a manner to cause a person to reasonably believe that the article is a deadly weapon;  or

(III) The kidnapping is accomplished by the perpetrator representing verbally or otherwise that he or she is armed with a deadly weapon.

https://codes.findlaw.com/co/title-18-criminal-code/co-rev-st-sect-18-3-302.html

 

[Derec]

Do you think this was kidnapping? You don't think that isn't Police overreach, which you know, is what everybody is fucking protesting about? Give me a fucking break.

I am not a lawyer, and have no idea whether what they are accused of doing would be kidnapping under Colorado law. I'd call it false imprisonment, but again, not a lawyer, specifically not a Colorado lawyer.

I do think what they are accused of doing is a crime and that if they are did it, they should be prosecuted and convicted. Do you disagree?

 

[Derec]

Is there evidence the doors were barricaded?

That's the accusation. Whether there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt is for the trial.
The question is: if they did what they are accused of doing, should they be criminally prosecuted or do you (and Zipr) want to give them a pass because they are on the left and were acting against police.

Or are we supposed to believe the cops were cowering inside their station, terrified that if they stepped outside they'd be abducted by Commies?

I do not think that matters to the question about their criminal culpability.

 

[Arctish]

Is there evidence the doors were barricaded?

That's the accusation. Whether there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt is for the trial.
The question is: if they did what they are accused of doing, should they be criminally prosecuted or do you (and Zipr) want to give them a pass because they are on the left and were acting against police.

If evidence exists that someone illegally imprisoned another person, he or she should be charged with that crime and prosecuted if the evidence is sufficient to bring the case to trial.

But if someone had no knowledge of the crime and is merely an associate of the ones who did it, or if they might have been involved but there's no evidence they were, or if the allegation is never substantiated with actual evidence of a crime, then he or she should not be arrested or charged.

Whether or not the alleged victims are police officers is irrelevant. The legal system is supposed to work the same way for everyone regardless of their place in society. .

 

[Patooka]

Do you think this was kidnapping? You don't think that isn't Police overreach, which you know, is what everybody is fucking protesting about? Give me a fucking break.

I am not a lawyer, and have no idea whether what they are accused of doing would be kidnapping under Colorado law. I'd call it false imprisonment, but again, not a lawyer, specifically not a Colorado lawyer.

I do think what they are accused of doing is a crime and that if they are did it, they should be prosecuted and convicted. Do you disagree?

Nope, don't disagree at all. A crime was committed and the people involved are being disproportionally persecuted because the cops' egos were bruised. Not a radical attitude. I'm not a Colorado lawyer either and I think the charges are excessive as fuck. If the cops were kidnapped, why not double down then and charge everyone involved with grand larceny as well considering they stole a police station?

 

[Valjean]

But the police were terrified! Had they exited the front door they might have been set upon by communist folk singers wielding guitars.

 

[Gun Nut]

The police were not kidnapped.. they were temporarily detained by citizen's arrest and no specific charges need be stated for 24 hours... at which time they can say "nevermind" and allow the little police kids to go about their business, thankful the citizen's only detained them for a short while while they worked out the situation. no harm no foul, right? Sounds perfectly fair and legal to the police.. it's their standard for how they operate.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Is there evidence the doors were barricaded?

That's the accusation. Whether there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt is for the trial.
The question is: if they did what they are accused of doing, should they be criminally prosecuted or do you (and Zipr) want to give them a pass because they are on the left and were acting against police.

If evidence exists that someone illegally imprisoned another person, he or she should be charged with that crime and prosecuted if the evidence is sufficient to bring the case to trial.

But if someone had no knowledge of the crime and is merely an associate of the ones who did it, or if they might have been involved but there's no evidence they were, or if the allegation is never substantiated with actual evidence of a crime, then he or she should not be arrested or charged.

Whether or not the alleged victims are police officers is irrelevant. The legal system is supposed to work the same way for everyone regardless of their place in society. .

Look at ZiprHead's posting of the law. Confining the cops to their station is first degree kidnapping under 18-3-301-1c. As the cops were unharmed it's a class 2 felony. Are you saying the crowd confining the cops didn't know they were confining the cops?!?!

This is just idiots who didn't realize their actions were considered serious crimes.

 

[Arctish]

If evidence exists that someone illegally imprisoned another person, he or she should be charged with that crime and prosecuted if the evidence is sufficient to bring the case to trial.

But if someone had no knowledge of the crime and is merely an associate of the ones who did it, or if they might have been involved but there's no evidence they were, or if the allegation is never substantiated with actual evidence of a crime, then he or she should not be arrested or charged.

Whether or not the alleged victims are police officers is irrelevant. The legal system is supposed to work the same way for everyone regardless of their place in society. .

Look at ZiprHead's posting of the law. Confining the cops to their station is first degree kidnapping under 18-3-301-1c. As the cops were unharmed it's a class 2 felony. Are you saying the crowd confining the cops didn't know they were confining the cops?!?!

This is just idiots who didn't realize their actions were considered serious crimes.

If someone organizes a political rally and a rally-goer steals a car while everyone else is marching around, the person responsible for that crime is the car thief, not the event organizer. Likewise if a rally-goer barricades a doorway.

Even if we assume that someone at the protest committed a class 2 felony that doesn't mean the organizers are responsible, or even knew it had happened.

 

[ZiprHead]

The July 3 protest in Aurora, Colorado, seemed, at least on the surface, like just another of the hundreds of racial justice protests that have swept the nation this year. Demonstrators sat outside a police station chanting and playing music. Although they said they wouldn’t leave until their demands were met, the protesters were cleared out by police around 4:30 a.m.
But several of the protest leaders are facing felony attempted kidnapping charges for allegedly imprisoning police officers in their own precinct during the protest—charges their fellow activists are calling absurd.

Zipr, do you think extremists should be allowed to occupy a police station and physically prevent police officers from exiting? If they violated the criminal law, why should they not be prosecuted?

There is no evidence the cops weren't allowed to leave and neither did they occupy the station. Where are you getting this from.?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If evidence exists that someone illegally imprisoned another person, he or she should be charged with that crime and prosecuted if the evidence is sufficient to bring the case to trial.

But if someone had no knowledge of the crime and is merely an associate of the ones who did it, or if they might have been involved but there's no evidence they were, or if the allegation is never substantiated with actual evidence of a crime, then he or she should not be arrested or charged.

Whether or not the alleged victims are police officers is irrelevant. The legal system is supposed to work the same way for everyone regardless of their place in society. .

Look at ZiprHead's posting of the law. Confining the cops to their station is first degree kidnapping under 18-3-301-1c. As the cops were unharmed it's a class 2 felony. Are you saying the crowd confining the cops didn't know they were confining the cops?!?!

This is just idiots who didn't realize their actions were considered serious crimes.

If someone organizes a political rally and a rally-goer steals a car while everyone else is marching around, the person responsible for that crime is the car thief, not the event organizer. Likewise if a rally-goer barricades a doorway.

Even if we assume that someone at the protest committed a class 2 felony that doesn't mean the organizers are responsible, or even knew it had happened.

I'm saying the people involved in confining them to the police station are all guilty of the class 2 felony. Protesters not involved in that aspect of the protest aren't guilty.