# Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 10, 2014, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942 "2014-10-10T07:35:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 413
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8242 "2016-05-16T21:20:02Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > What “arrest” was she resisting? The _off-duty_ said he was “trespassing” her-all that means is that the NEXT time she came on the property she could be arrested. At the time of the incident there was no _legal_ reason to detain her or her companion. An officer can detain someone for investigative purposes without arresting them. Such a person does not have the right to just leave when they feel like it - that is resisting arrest even if no arrest has yet been effected. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8243 "2016-05-16T21:27:14Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > I know of no law that forbids me from believing someone who has not been found guilty is in fact guilty. She is factually not guilty. Period. You contest this because you are a lying sack of shit. > [@](#): > > I repeat the question you haven’t answered yet - is it a lie to say OJ Simpson is a murderer? “Murder” is defined as unlawful killing. “Unlawful” requires conviction in a court of law. Period. You’re playing games with legal and common usage of terms because you are a lying sack of shit. > [@Smapti](#): > > An officer can detain someone for investigative purposes without arresting them. Such a person does not have the right to just leave when they feel like it - that is resisting arrest even if no arrest has yet been effected. The girl was factually not guilty of resisting arrest. Period. You do not acknowledge this because you are a lying sack of shit. Let me explain this to you in small words because you are a moron: the girl did not resist arrest. Period. Now stop lying about it, you lying sack of shit. ---
**Author:** ![Dave\_Hartwick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7feea3/32.png) [@Dave\_Hartwick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dave_Hartwick)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8244 "2016-05-16T21:29:25Z")
Bunch of dickheads, the lot of you, for engaging with Smapti at such length. You’re the idiots Miller was talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8245 "2016-05-16T21:35:39Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > She is factually not guilty. Period. You contest this because you are a lying sack of shit. False. The video doesn’t lie. > [@](#): > > Murder" is defined as unlawful killing. “Unlawful” requires conviction in a court of law. Period. You’re playing games with legal and common usage of terms because you are a lying sack of shit. I am playing no games. You’re the one pretending that a person cannot simultaneously be legally innocent and factually guilty and dodging the question. Is it a lie to say OJ Simpson is a murderer? > [@](#): > > Now stop lying about it, you lying sack of shit. You have no facts. All you have is childish insults. It’s plain to any partial observer who’s correct here and it’s not you. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8246 "2016-05-16T21:39:12Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > False. The video doesn’t lie. A court of law determined that her behavior was not resisting arrest. I understand that you don’t believe in the rule of law and seek to replace it with your own personal moral judgement, but that’s not how we do things in Smapti-town. > [@](#): > > I am playing no games. You’re the one pretending that a person cannot simultaneously be legally innocent and factually guilty and dodging the question. Is it a lie to say OJ Simpson is a murderer? If you believe in the rule of law, then OJ is factually not guilty of murder. Do you believe in the rule of law? > [@](#): > > You have no facts. All you have is childish insults. It’s plain to any partial observer who’s correct here and it’s not you. I have the fact that the girl is factually not guilty of breaking the law. Period. Also, you are a fucking moron and a liar. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8247 "2016-05-16T21:45:09Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > The girl was not convicted of assault or resisting arrest, therefore she is not guilty of assault or resting arrest The law says she is not guilty. Smapti says she is guilty, but if the law says she is not guilty then Smapti must conform to the law, then Smapti must say she is not guilty, but Smapti cannot say she is not guilty because Smapti says she is guilty, but she is not guilty… She is guilty but she is not guilty… illogical! Illogical! Please explain! You are human. Only humans can explain their behavior! Please explain! ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8248 "2016-05-16T21:47:36Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Clarify for me: did the girl commit assault, in the legal sense? Did the girl resist arrest, in the legal sense? > [@Smapti](#): > > It is my assessment based on the available evidence that she did. Wrong. The evidence made available to you on this very thread proves that she did not, and indeed that it was logically impossible for her to do so; one who is not in fact under arrest cannot possibly resist arrest. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8249 "2016-05-16T21:49:43Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > An officer can detain someone for investigative purposes without arresting them. Such a person does not have the right to just leave when they feel like it - that is resisting arrest even if no arrest has yet been effected. Detainment by the police **is the definition of “arrest”**. If you’re going to continue clapping your hands over your ears and humming loudly and rocking in place, do be careful not to rock so energetically as to fall off your wall. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8250 "2016-05-16T21:50:55Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > A court of law determined that her behavior was not resisting arrest. False. No trial was ever conducted. > [@](#): > > I understand that you don’t believe in the rule of law and seek to replace it with your own personal moral judgement I am doing no such thing. The rule of law does not forbid me from having my own opinion. I do not assert that my opinion is legally binding. > [@](#): > > If you believe in the rule of law, then OJ is factually not guilty of murder. False. It is possible for a factually guilty person to be acquitted. Is it a lie to say OJ Simpson is a murderer? Answer in three letters or less. > [@](#): > > I have the fact that the girl is factually not guilty of breaking the law. Period. You can stick your fingers in your ears and repeat your mantra as many times as you like, but it won’t erase the video of her resisting arrest. > [@](#): > > Also, you are a fucking moron and a liar. When you have to resort to name-calling, you’re admitting that you don’t have anything real to base your argument on. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8251 "2016-05-16T21:52:38Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Detainment by the police **is the definition of “arrest”**. [Terry stops](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop) have been discussed at length in this thread and in several other threads. It’s like every time a new “controversy” pops up we reset and everyone forgets everything they’ve been taught about these issues before. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8252 "2016-05-16T21:59:23Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Once again, _what arrest was she resisting?_ No idea. Didn’t see the video. I’m not saying he was right. I was just stating my opinion that cops do not surrender their arrest power at the end of their shift anymore than they surrender their duty to act if they see a crime and what not. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8253 "2016-05-16T22:00:18Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > False. No trial was ever conducted. {…} Why was no trial was ever conducted? Here’s a hint, If there isn’t enough evidence to convict, you get found not guilty. If there isn’t enough evidence to indict, you get the charges dropped. For someone so in love with “Authority” you really don’t seem to have a clue as to how it works. CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8254 "2016-05-16T22:01:03Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > [Terry stops](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop) have been discussed at length in this thread and in several other threads. It’s like every time a new “controversy” pops up we reset and everyone forgets everything they’ve been taught about these issues before. It’s certainly convenient of you to post links to disproofs of your assertions: > [@](#): > > In the United States, a “Terry stop” is a brief detention of a person by police _on reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activity_ but short of probable cause to arrest. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8255 "2016-05-16T22:05:19Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > False. No trial was ever conducted. Jesus Christ, are you genuinely this stupid? No need to answer that. In order for the girl to be guilty of resisting arrest, she must be convicted in court of resisting arrest. The judge heard the charges and dismissed them. Therefore she is legally and factually not guilty of resisting arrest. I think it’s funny that you believe in the inviolability of the rule of law to such an extent that you are willing to disregard it when you start to lose an internet argument. Rest assured, this does not lower anyone’s opinion of you. > [@](#): > > False. It is possible for a factually guilty person to be acquitted. This is of course wrong in our legal system. The court is the only arbiter of guilt. You are thinking of moral guilt, which makes you a hypocrite given how much time you spend railing against people who believe in the concept of moral guilt. You’re probably too stupid to understand that you’re a hypocrite. > [@](#): > > Is it a lie to say OJ Simpson is a murderer? Answer in three letters or less. Yes. > [@](#): > > You can stick your fingers in your ears and repeat your mantra as many times as you like, but it won’t erase the video of her resisting arrest. A court determined that the video did not show her resisting arrest. Apparently you don’t believe in the rule of law, so call her behavior anything you like, you hypocritical lying douchebag. > [@](#): > > When you have to resort to name-calling, you’re admitting that you don’t have anything real to base your argument on. All I have to base my argument on is reality, facts, and the rule of law. None of which mean anything to you apparently, you disgusting hypocrite. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8256 "2016-05-16T22:08:34Z")
I like how in all this focus on arrest and detainment, the fact that he threw her up against a car in a choke hold, whipped her around _by the hair_, and threw her to the ground only to then taser the fuck out of her is getting overlooked here. I don’t care if the cop did have the right to detain her. It’s obvious he didn’t have the right to assault her with so much force. He is not fit to be a mall cop, let alone a real cop. I sincerely hope she sues him so hard that even cat food will be too expensive for his budget. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8257 "2016-05-16T22:12:49Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > In order for the girl to be guilty of resisting arrest, she must be convicted in court of resisting arrest. The judge heard the charges and dismissed them. Therefore she is legally and factually not guilty of resisting arrest. If a man commits a murder and nobody ever finds out, is he therefore not guilty of murder? > [@](#): > > I think it’s funny that you believe in the inviolability of the rule of law to such an extent that you are willing to disregard it when you start to lose an internet argument. I repeat; _the rule of law does not forbid me from having my own opinion._ I don’t think you understand the meaning of the words you’re using. > [@](#): > > You are thinking of moral guilt, which makes you a hypocrite given how much time you spend railing against people who believe in the concept of moral guilt. No, I’m thinking of factual guilt. “Moral guilt” is not a concept I have any use for. > [@](#): > > A court determined that the video did not show her resisting arrest. No trial has been conducted. > [@](#): > > In the United States, a “Terry stop” is a brief detention of a person by police on reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activity but short of probable cause to arrest. And at the time the officer believed he had reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activity. That’s the entire reason he was prepared to trespass her. > [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > If there isn’t enough evidence to convict, you get found not guilty. > If there isn’t enough evidence to indict, you get the charges dropped. That’s nice. It still doesn’t mean she’s been found not guilty of anything. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8258 "2016-05-16T22:15:11Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > {…} In order for the girl to be guilty of resisting arrest, she must be convicted in court of resisting arrest. The judge heard the charges and dismissed them. Therefore she is legally and factually not guilty of resisting arrest. {…} Therefore legally and factually the crime of resisting arrest did not occur. Dismissal is better than “Not Guilty”! “Not Guilty” still means that a crime occurred but the evidence is not sufficient for a conviction. Dismissal means there isn’t even enough evidence to say a crime occurred. But _someone_ doesn’t understand the very basic facts of how our system actually works! CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8259 "2016-05-16T22:17:36Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Therefore legally and factually the crime of resisting arrest did not occur. False. No finding of fact was made. > [@](#): > > “Not Guilty” still means that a crime occurred but the evidence is not sufficient for a conviction. > Dismissal means there isn’t even enough evidence to say a crime occurred. But _it doesn’t mean she’s not guilty of the crime_. She has not been acquitted and double jeopardy has not attached. She can still be charged and tried at a later date. > [@](#): > > But someone doesn’t understand the very basic facts of how our system actually works! Several people in this thread, actually. I’m not one of them. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8260 "2016-05-16T22:19:27Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > {…} That’s nice. It still doesn’t mean she’s been found not guilty of anything. No, a judge found that no crime occurred, that’s less not guilty than NG moran! CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2016, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/8261 "2016-05-16T22:20:49Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > No, a judge found that no crime occurred Dismissal of charges is not a finding that no crime occurred. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=412) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=414)