alone and in jail and if you if you have numbers in your favor then you are making progress and that's why the panel we took the accuser the emotional victim out of the loop we're disinterested parties but we know enough to look at the evidence and we have a list of criminal statutes we've studied case law about those statutes that we've read federal and state and we're going to hear evidence from this person and the way those are the rules of the panel nobody escapes that so anyway worst case they'll fly off the handle and you have to be ready for that as well with knowledge of what constitutes a this will result in criminal charges against you and your children your spouse and anyone who lives within ten city blocks of where the protest was where it was what do the courts say about this is such a protest a threat to commit an act of unlawful violence in the middle of the page if you're a felon and i'm going to convince others that they have the authority to arrest you and you will be arrested this is as close as i would come to presenting this to a public servant twice maybe you might say you're under arrest i'm not waiting for others is that a threat isn't a violation of law can this statement be used as valid grounds to prosecute one who makes that particular state and to a public servant or other individuals to examples of federal statutes you have eighteen u s c eight seventy five interstate communications that triggers federal jurisdiction and demand a request for a ransom or reward for the release of a kidnapped person or with instead the intent to extort money out of somebody to threaten to kidnap any person or threaten to injure another person or see a threat to kidnap any person or threat to injure the other person so if i said in the email i'm going to rape you know five years in prison i understand the nature of the statutes they may choose to use against you eighteen u s c eight seventy nine threats against former presidents or certain other persons like a presidential candidate and we have only next page that's obviously a threat to commit an act of unlawful violence against another the individual water bag this area on a blog said these things about presidential candidate  car and poof and you click on that leg b s and he goes to a fifty caliber rifle click on proved on the block and went to a video of a car being blown up by a propane bottles and they brought charges against him saying this is a threat to commit an act of unlawful flight and against a candidate obama in the ninth circuit ruled it does not convey the notion the bag despairing statement makes no reference to back to syria himself and so it cannot reasonably be taken to express his intent to shoot obama if fails to express an intent on his part to take any action it is not sufficient to establish that he intended to threaten obama himself as we have explained back on page ninety eight  that neither of bags there in statements on its face constitutes a true threat i'm protected by the first amendment most significantly one is pretty predictive and the other exploratorium meaning he was only under the statute so it has to be uttered in first person context i will act in a certain way i will commit the act of a lawful violence not a projection and not a request of others to do this so back to our threat clause of the second page you're a felon and i'm going to convince others that they have the authority to arrest you and you will be arrested it's a projection made its third person content so it's important to know what is and is not a threat on your circuit this is ninth circuit study your circuit kno what a threat isn't is not if you're going to get into the business of holding public servants to the letter of the law believe that you're a felon you know so and i move on to page eight the threat of conduct must constitute unlawful violence and the threat must express a first person intent on the part of the speaker to s indented quote putting certain individual individuals in harms way i see willing them out for the attentions of violent unrelated third parties this conduct chris that protected by the first amendment i've ever seen this was an instance where william she ham came to dislike intensely the police officers on the staff in kirkland washington and they started developing justice files or database containing all the personal information you could find relating to any public servant he learned in washington state state corrections officers county drug task force prosecutors cops lieutenants detectives prost anybody else where he could find it included bankruptcy court divorce court tax court criminal and civil court state and fed docket numbers ira's tax lien numbers home in the work e mail on work phone number home and work email address he had an aerial photographs of some of their homes and he had photographs of some of their license plates like the law and in the case of kirkland police he found online their social security numbers and included was just a misdemeanor statute against publishing that information in correlation with the fact that they're public servants and they have a civil clause in there saying if the public servant is damaged from such a couple thing they consumed y and before the ink was dry he hired eleanor gorilla a seattle attorney and she sued in u s district court and killed that law on free speech grounds before the ink was dry but out of that case the chief judge at that point i think it was journalist who now or wrote the opinion and quoted planned parenthood case saying put certain individuals in harms way by singling them out for detention for violent but unrelated third party is protected speech the next page of citizens arrest the authorities below suffice to prove the legality of the rest of the person of a suspected felon indented is a washington state supreme court case nine hundred sixty four jeff state versus jack the rule seems to be similar when an arrest is a so called citizen's arrest made by one not a law enforcement officer it requires reasonable cause to believe the resident particularly of a felony before the arrest will support a search and seizure of evidence of the koran information belief or suspicion as to the commission of a felony this document goes on to provide a wealth of excerpts as well as citations of citizen's arrest cases from coast to coast some of which were decided in favor of a public servant who was acting outside of their jurisdiction hey i got arrested by this officer over here he was outside of his jurisdiction and the court said it doesn't matter because even without jurisdiction as a public servant he didn't he didn't cease to be a citizen when he left his jurisdiction and he has reasonable suspicion to believe you've committed a felony and so as a citizen he could make an  this case law is very broad state and federal felons governed by state law but it's a common law right and it applies even to public servants that are outside their jurisdiction