RIOT LAW & LEGAL DEFINITION
In my opinion and I hope it will be an opinion of any
lawyer, new or old. I am trying to say this in layman’s terms the best I can.
So bear with me taxpayers, I spent many hours and arguments on this one.
A riot occurs when a defined number of people, usually a
minimum of three, intentionally or recklessly causes or creates a grave risk of
public terror or alarm. A person commits the crime of inciting a riot if he
commands, solicits, incites or urges another person to engage in tumultuous and
violent conduct of a kind likely to cause or create grave risk of public terror
or alarm. Riots disturb the peace and safety and require police action.
The three members of the Board of Selectmen created an act
of inciting a riot by voting for an appointment against the will of the taxpayers.
Not even taking into consideration two other members of the Board voting
profusely against the appointment for fear of the Board inciting a riot, which
three of the BOS did accomplish. Also the above mentioned appointment was not
on the agenda. The chair said abruptly we will vote on this issue as the
audience of taxpayers that filled the meeting room warned the chair by voice
not to do this illegal act. The crowd was not protesting violently and the police
should have cited Columbus, Wilder and Mullins for inciting a riot. This is
gross obstruction of justice on the 3 select board members and the 3 policemen
that attended that meeting to keep the peace not to allow 3 people to incite a
riot.
Tumultuous means (uproar) full of tumult. Please comment
Let me try this. I may get my head cut off, but, here goes. Your definition of a riot is correct, and your definition of incite is correct. In this case, the selectmen, using poor judgement, did "incite" an act that could have resulted in a "riot", however, the sensible crowd did not act out. They spoke out against it with angry tones, but, never acted violently or tumultuously as in the definition of a "riot", therefore, the police had a peaceful group of protesters to move along without arrest. In other words there was no crime. It's like telling a dog to sic. someone. If he doesn't move, there is no injury, there is no crime. Goes to show you how the justice system works in this country. Problem is, if you are the riotee, you will be arrested, not the incitee. Take a minute to digest this. It's not what we would like it to be, but, I think it is what it is.
ReplyDeleteI think Check is correct. "Team Columbus " would like nothing better than the large crowd to become unruly. All the better to discredit Pauly and Citizens4templeton. They will continue to try to bait the audience that attends these meetings. Unfortunately bad government isn't against the law
ReplyDeleteAs much as it kills to bite our tongues, in the end we will be better off. What do you think the Gardner News came snooping around for, when we had our peacefull protest. They would love to write something negative about us. We have done good so far, let the three stooges make themselvs look bad. Like I always say, "It is the best revenge to live well, and come out looking good." Our motto should be "we are not the problem"
Delete