Cops arrest man for assault, no assault took place

I started a thread months back called "Whats going on in this small town?", feel free to read that thread if this issue peaks your interest.

This article came out of the local newspaper a few days ago and I wanted to give it some exposure, I am tired of them getting away with everything and anything here

After a three-hour standoff, 24-year-old Joshua Michael Lemaster, of California, was arrested late Monday afternoon at his current residence, 260 House Road in Sequim. Earlier in the day, Lemaster, aka Tyler Michael Williams, allegedly was involved in an argument with a neighbor. Clallam County Sheriff’s deputies developed probable cause for Lemaster’s committing assault in the fourth degree. Neighbors said tensions recently had risen between Lemaster and nearby residents. At 3 p.m., authorities were called to the neighborhood because Lemaster allegedly was seen with a gun and threatened to shoot the neighbors. Plans were developed to contact Lemaster from outside the house while the Clallam County Sheriff’s Office Criminal Investigations Bureau applied for a warrant to go into Lemaster’s residence and arrest him. Clallam County Sheriff’s Detective Tom Reyes, a crisis negotiator, used a bullhorn to call Lemaster out. When calls went unanswered, a team of deputies entered the home and took Lemaster into custody without incident.

Sequim Gazette

the first thing I noticed was that this guy was arrested for assault but it didn't say anything about him actually hitting/attacking anyone. "Arguing" is not grounds for an assault charge, nor is it probable cause to go into someone's home.
Second thing I noticed was all the manpower it took to take this guy into Custody - I'm not surprised he didn't come out of his home, that many law enforcement outside is very intimidating - you would think that it was a hostage situation, or that he had actually shot someone.
So let me get this straight, you get into an argument with a neighbor, they call the police and say some stuff about you owning a gun and threatening to use it and THIS is the end result? The man was in his house, as far as I can tell he didn't hurt anyone - how can anyone say that this man committed a damn crime? We are still protected by the first amendment - I can't just call the police and say John said he was gonna shoot up the neighborhood and have them come arrest John in his home - John has to COMMIT A CRIME first!

according to the revised code of washington state the exact definition of assault 4 is:
RCW 9A.36.041
Assault in the fourth degree.

(1) A person is guilty of assault in the fourth degree if, under circumstances not amounting to assault in the first, second, or third degree, or custodial assault, he or she assaults another.

(2) Assault in the fourth degree is a gross misdemeanor.

[1987 c 188 § 2; 1986 c 257 § 7.]

strange it doesn't say anything about threatening the neighborhood.

Anyway, that is my opinion on this article but I really wanna hear yours. thanks

Side note - I can't find it on youtube, but a few years ago, the County I live in, Clallam County, was named the 2nd or 3rd most corrupt County in the United States, if anyone can find that link please share it with me - I believe it was a 60 minutes episode.

Maybe you don't know...but that happens ALL THE TIME.

Most of the time, the police beats YOU up and charges YOU for assault against HIM/HER.

Lots of power hungry scum in the police force.

well I know it happens all the time here, but I'd be really surprised if it happened in, say, San Diego, where I am from. Just a couple of months ago, in San Diego, my mothers neighbor called the police on her and said all sorts of stuff/lies, including that my mom said she was gonna kill this lady. If the cops had just taken her word for it, my mom would have gone to Jail. But they didn't. No crime had been committed. neighbors have arguments, it happens all the time, things get tense, people say things they don't mean.. but I agree with you, it's getting real scary out there.

My ex-son in law was arrested for making a verbal threat, and it was considered an assault. This was in Louisiana. He was not brandishing a weapon, but stated he was going to hit someone, which he did not do.

I did notice in the article that it said the man was allegedly seen with a gun and making threats.

I don't know where you live, but everyone in my neighborhood would have called the police in this situation also.

Are you actually insinuating that somebody needed to be hurt in order for something to be done?

Suppose your children were outside playing? I mean this was at 3p.m.

First off why does he have a full named AKA?

Second what is his criminal history? Like it or not an alligation was made by a victim and to get the warrant they needed Probable Cause so it could be signed off by a judge. The reaction could be due to a violent past or other armed run ins?

Third you posted the 4th Subsection but NOT the original definition of assault in your state...meaning subsection 4 by itself means nothing without the original elements....please post the entire statute so we can see if a law was in fact broken.

Forth and finally...this one story does NOT give much detal on what actually occured...but just because a story is short on or lacking facts, evidence, PC, doesn't mean the cops were.

Or maybe you just live in a screwed up area where the law is handled WAY differently then here...

reply to post by rcwj1975


I only quoted the assault 4 because there is no general description of assault like there is for, say, robbery. here is the link : Revised code of Washington

reply to post by Blanca Rose


I understand why you feel the way you do, I do. Sure, I understand calling the Cops, my problem starts with the cops coming to the neighborhood - nothing going on - and taking a neighbors word for what happened and arresting this man in his home. I am not the one that says we should wait til a crime is committed to arrest someone, it is the law that says that, (minus conspiracy)


I don't know the law in Louisiana but some states have tougher assault laws than others, in Washington, you have to actually physically touch them.


[edit on 30-4-2010 by itsblownbackbaby]

Originally posted by itsblownbackbaby
I only quoted the assault 4 because there is no general description of assault like there is for, say, robbery. here is the link : Revised code of Washington

Actually there is. Like here in GA they look at the first and sometimes second degree elements and then in subsections 3, 4, 5 and so on, revert back to the original elements of assault. The link you provided shows me this....

Assault in the First degree:

Assault in the first degree.

(1) A person is guilty of assault in the first degree if he or she, with intent to inflict great bodily harm:

(a) Assaults another with a firearm or any deadly weapon or by any force or means likely to produce great bodily harm or death; or

(b) Administers, exposes, or transmits to or causes to be taken by another, poison, the human immunodeficiency virus as defined in chapter 70.24 RCW, or any other destructive or noxious substance; or

(c) Assaults another and inflicts great bodily harm.

(2) Assault in the first degree is a class A felony.

They also then give elements in the second degree:

Assault in the second degree.

(1) A person is guilty of assault in the second degree if he or she, under circumstances not amounting to assault in the first degree:

(a) Intentionally assaults another and thereby recklessly inflicts substantial bodily harm; or

(b) Intentionally and unlawfully causes substantial bodily harm to an unborn quick child by intentionally and unlawfully inflicting any injury upon the mother of such child; or

(c) Assaults another with a deadly weapon; or

(d) With intent to inflict bodily harm, administers to or causes to be taken by another, poison or any other destructive or noxious substance; or

(e) With intent to commit a felony, assaults another; or

(f) Knowingly inflicts bodily harm which by design causes such pain or agony as to be the equivalent of that produced by torture; or

(g) Assaults another by strangulation.

(2)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, assault in the second degree is a class B felony.

(b) Assault in the second degree with a finding of sexual motivation under RCW 9.94A.835 or 13.40.135 is a class A felony.

And finally the third degree:

Assault in the third degree.

(1) A person is guilty of assault in the third degree if he or she, under circumstances not amounting to assault in the first or second degree:

(a) With intent to prevent or resist the execution of any lawful process or mandate of any court officer or the lawful apprehension or detention of himself or another person, assaults another; or

(b) Assaults a person employed as a transit operator or driver, the immediate supervisor of a transit operator or driver, a mechanic, or a security officer, by a public or private transit company or a contracted transit service provider, while that person is performing his or her official duties at the time of the assault; or

(c) Assaults a school bus driver, the immediate supervisor of a driver, a mechanic, or a security officer, employed by a school district transportation service or a private company under contract for transportation services with a school district, while the person is performing his or her official duties at the time of the assault; or

(d) With criminal negligence, causes bodily harm to another person by means of a weapon or other instrument or thing likely to produce bodily harm; or

(e) Assaults a firefighter or other employee of a fire department, county fire marshal's office, county fire prevention bureau, or fire protection district who was performing his or her official duties at the time of the assault; or

(f) With criminal negligence, causes bodily harm accompanied by substantial pain that extends for a period sufficient to cause considerable suffering; or

(g) Assaults a law enforcement officer or other employee of a law enforcement agency who was performing his or her official duties at the time of the assault; or

(h) Assaults a peace officer with a projectile stun gun; or

(i) Assaults a nurse, physician, or health care provider who was performing his or her nursing or health care duties at the time of the assault. For purposes of this subsection: "Nurse" means a person licensed under chapter 18.79 RCW; "physician" means a person licensed under chapter 18.57 or 18.71 RCW; and "health care provider" means a person certified under chapter 18.71 or 18.73 RCW who performs emergency medical services or a person regulated under Title 18 RCW and employed by, or contracting with, a hospital licensed under chapter 70.41 RCW.

(2) Assault in the third degree is a class C felony.

So the 4th degree FEEDS off the first three by saying if NONE of the above elements are met, but there is still a FORM of said elements they CAN charge the 4th degree. Sounds to me like the gun accusation made them treat it as first or second degree and then after they arrested him in the house unarmed dropped it to 4th degree based on they testimony of the victim minus the presence of any weapons.

reply to post by itsblownbackbaby


It could very well be that I missed something in the article, or that you are reading more into it, but, where did it say that the neighbors made this up?

If he was outside with a gun threatening, and went back inside, well, then he should have been arrested.

If the neighbors made all of that up, well then, they need to be arrested for filing a false police report.

It's a two way street, especially when it isn't really clear what went on in this situation.

you don't make any sense - in each of those subsections you have to physically assault someone, all the way down to assault 4. Theres nothing that says a threat = assault!

reply to post by itsblownbackbaby


Thats my point...they charged him with 4th degree because he didn't actually hurt anyone and the 4th degree is obviously broad...REALLY broad. Not saying its right, just saying why they PROBABLY did it. I can tell you this...here in GA...if a misdemeanor is committed outside the presence of a LEO, the victim has to file a report with us and THEY go to the courts to file for the arrest warrant. Talk about cutting down on BS false or fake alligations..lol

this happens everyday, until our punishments involve actions of love, everything remains the same.

reply to post by rcwj1975


yeah, I see what you're saying, they went out there all hot n heavy hoping to land an assault 1 charge but then as it unfolded all they could manage was assault 4..

still isn't right because it's not the proper charge, if there is no charge that would fit the situation then to me its just not a crime. It may not be right, I definitely think the guy was acting like an idiot, but just because I emotionally think that, doesn't change the rule of law.

thanks for debating with me

reply to post by itsblownbackbaby


Exactly right.....not sure how your state works but some agency will charge the lesser offense for the alligation and let the victim and suspect fight it out in court. Thats why I like GA....we don't arrest just because someone says this is what happened, especially on a misdemeanor. The only thing I can think caused the cops to arrest the guy anyway is known as a failure of justice. Meaning did they believe that if they DIDN'T arrest him then, would he cause problems later that night and if he did have a weapon what COULD of happened....so they went with the Assault 4.

Anyway, your welcome...I'll check in to see if you ever get any updates.