I'm raising money for Disabled Mom And Child, NEED HELP. Click to Donate: https://gofundme.com/f/20bt1eu6w0?sharetype=teams&member=5439946&rcid=r01-162207885805-e4529022e4e64df1&pc=tw_co_campmgmt_m&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=p_lico+share-sheet+chico96c #GoFundMe
On June 20, 1892, Jackson Plummer, a 60 year-old man in ill health, left his home with his handgun and went looking for members of the town board of Kentland, Indiana. The board had ordered Plummer to trim his trees and he objected.[2] Plummer came into contact with John Keefe and a man named Elliott, and Keefe told Plummer to go home, the board was not going to cut down his trees.[³] Plummer started walking home, but not before he had pointed the pistol at Elliott and a board member named Conklin, and had threatened the town marshal, if he were to show up. James Dorn, who was the marshal of the town, then arrived.[3] Dorn struck Plummer with a billy club and then shot at him with a revolver without first informing Plummer of any intention to arrest him. Before Dorn struck and shot at Plummer, Plummer had not resisted or behaved violently; he had walked toward his home with a revolver in his hand and told the officer to keep away. Dorn and Plummer exchanged gunshots, each hitting the other and Dorn died
from the gunshot wound. [3³]Plummer v. State was an 1893 court case
decided by the Indiana Supreme Court. The case overturned a manslaughter conviction, ruling that the convicted defendant had been protecting himself from the illegal use of force by a police officer.[¹] It is widely quoted on the internet, under the false belief that it gives citizens the right to resist an unlawful arrest by force, including deadly force. The full citation is Plummer v. State, 135 Ind. 308, 34
N.E. 968 (1893).https://vocal.media/criminal/the-art-of-war-mmbnrv03cr
from the gunshot wound. [3³]Plummer v. State was an 1893 court case
decided by the Indiana Supreme Court. The case overturned a manslaughter conviction, ruling that the convicted defendant had been protecting himself from the illegal use of force by a police officer.[¹] It is widely quoted on the internet, under the false belief that it gives citizens the right to resist an unlawful arrest by force, including deadly force. The full citation is Plummer v. State, 135 Ind. 308, 34
N.E. 968 (1893).https://vocal.media/criminal/the-art-of-war-mmbnrv03cr
