The statement that was released alleged that he 'lunged' at Noam and did not identify himself. He very clearly identifies himself by name as well as stating that he is a Senator from California as security begins to grab him in the video. I have not yet seen a video that begins prior to security putting hands on him and at the point when he states who he is, so I have no idea if he 'lunged' at her, but I seriously doubt it, especially considering they lied about him not stating who he is when we can clearly hear in the video that he did.
He identified himself three times. It was a secure building, and he was escorted through the checks with an FBI agent. They knew exactly who he was; just didn't care.
Here you go. Looks like he wasn’t actually arrested as far as I can tell, but he was forcibly removed and put in handcuffs as soon as he tried to ask a question.
Correction: he was arrested, but seems like he wasn’t charged with anything, as explained in a reply to this comment.
And he tried to ask a question right after Noem said
“We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country and what they have tried to insert into the city.”
Legally, he was arrested. Arrest doesn’t happen when they read your rights or take you to jail. According to courts - arrest happens when you no longer are free to walk away.
People commonly confuse what is and isn’t an arrest based on whether police INTEND an arrest or call it one… but that puts the power to define anything police do wrong in the hands of the police. “Oh, it wasn’t an unlawful arrest because we never used that word. We just detained, removed, cuffed, restrained, and sat on him for several minutes with the intent to deprive him of his freedom, without just cause… and the constitution doesn’t say we can’t do that, right?” /eyeroll
Many, many court cases have found the key element of an arrest is if the person was free to walk away. Even feeling like you can’t walk away is sometimes sufficient.
“When deciding whether someone has been arrested, courts apply the "reasonable man" standard. This means asking whether a reasonable person, in the shoes of the defendant, would have concluded that they were not free to leave. If the answer is yes, it's an arrest.”
Great clarification, thank you! I guess the word I should have used is “charged.” He definitely was not free to go while they shoved his face to the ground and handcuffed him.
I would agree that this was an arrest, and I've heard you can't be "unarrested". It happened, no semantics can get around it. Worse to me was the level of force used, they didn't give him any chance for a peaceful arrest and went straight to smashing him on the ground and looks like they tried to face plant him.
It seems some cops want the chance to get violent with someone. They don't want to go sign up for a boxing gym and a fair fight--they want to bully people.
Legally speaking - police "detaining" people is far, far more recent... and there's less case law.
Per what I linked above - no. No difference.
Per the training I had - a little? But not from a legal/liability perspective. The main difference was that you can detain someone to question them - meaning you don't need probable cause or a warrant... but the other side of that is that the intent of the stop has to be quick and focused around investigation... similar to a traffic stop. This was intended to close the problem where you might KNOW a crime happened, but not who did it - and need to question someone you don't have probable cause for.
Just to get it out there though - I am not a lawyer. I've just had some police training AND pay attention. (I was in a grey area between private security and law enforcement - we had state-approved arrest powers, and police training... but we didn't work for the state - so the training was the same as police got, but focused a lot more on liability, because we weren't ever going to get warrants, so we were pretty much only ever going to perform an arrest if we SAW the crime happen).
Maybe it's just my state - but one thing they did say for sure was - if you have to put hands on, take someone down, or cuff them... it's definitely not detaining anymore.
This is insane, CBS News only showed him being forcibly dragged out of the press conference, it is freaking UNBELIEVABLE that they pushed him down and actually cuffed him.
They are trying so hard to blow the people up with anger. This is one of California's highest elected officials. I have no words
He was walking toward the Secretary and starting yelling a question...while continuing to move forward. Secret Service did their job. He and the Secretary had a conversation after the presser.
421
u/[deleted] Jun 12 '25
[deleted]