VIGILANTE JUSTICE DELIVERS MESSAGE

Who among us can't appreciate a little vigilante justice?

When crime victims turn the tables on the bad guys, knowing help from
the police is not imminent, it makes us all feel less helpless. It
also puts a little fear into would-be bad guys, who quickly realize
that not everybody in society is a lamb waiting for the slaughter.

There's a thin line, however, between protecting yourself and going
overboard. Tales are common of people who took justice into their own
hands with an eye-for-an-eye mentality that ended up with the one-time
victims in jail.

That's why police are generally conflicted about vigilante justice.
They want citizens to protect themselves, but they don't want citizens
to step over that line.

A case in Butte Creek Canyon this week tested everyone's resolve on
what's acceptable when it comes to vigilante justice. The end result:
We were just fine with the outcome.

Here's where the ethical conflicts come in.

As first reported, two teenagers were assaulted and held against their
will by a man brandishing a gun near Helltown. Horrible, no?

Well, it turns out the two teenagers were apparently trying to steal
from the man, so they got what they deserved, right?

But the teenagers were allegedly trying to steal marijuana plants. So,
it seemed, everybody was in the wrong.

No, the man was a medical marijuana patient who had a legal right to
his plants. That made the boys simple thieves again.

But it was later learned that the man didn't just Advertisement hold
the boys until the sheriff arrived for the trespassers. In fact, he
never called the sheriff. Instead, he and his son allegedly roughed up
the intruders, stuck a gun barrel in the back of one of the boys, and
fired the shotgun at least once to scare them. That muddies the water
again.

The medical marijuana patient, 37-year-old Carl Coleman Jr., was
arrested on Monday. He was booked on felony charges of assault with a
deadly weapon and false imprisonment. Two days later, District
Attorney Mike Ramsey dropped the charges.

"Although it does appear that Mr. Coleman may have gone a bit beyond
the reasonableness standard, we don't believe we could prove it (to a
jury)," said Ramsey.

The two teenagers remain in juvenile hall, where they'll be tried on
charges of attempted burglary. We'd bet they won't make that mistake
again, with Coleman or any other potential victim.

By not becoming a victim, Coleman likely saved others from becoming
future victims.