Others are hellbent on being Quislings, les petits fachos
I’ve heard the audio and it’s just another case of a celebrity acting like they are better than everyone else.
Circle gets the square.
No, there are local review boards that people can complain to. They can also bring it up with their elected representatives or even sue. As I said, it’s not immediate gratification, but it’s better than anyone getting hurt
And some prefer to live to kneel another day. That’s the way of things.
Is this a trick question? Posting a lot to [del]brown nose[/del] support the police no matter how bad their behavior?
I posit that either his father was a cop that beat this into him or his spouse is one that will never give up the nookie again if he doesn’t act like a fool at every opportunity to [del]brown nose[/del] support her profession.
And this is the only factual thing you’ve said in the tread. Good job at getting 1 out of 9,999 correct.
(post shortened)
The Terry Stop would be my choice. Police had a reasonable suspicion.
The officer would have had a reasonable suspicion that a person(s) may be involved in criminal activity because they were at the reported location and met the descriptions of the suspected persons. Further investigation would have permitted the officer to stop the person for a brief time and take additional steps to investigate further.
Hiibel contented that his conviction violated the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition on self-incrimination which, as I understand it, failed because the disclosure of his name and identity presented no reasonable danger of incrimination.
And some of us cite specific circuit court decisions or Constitutional Amendments, while others cite interpretations from random attorneys on the internet.
So it’s wrong to obey the law.
Why do you hate democracy so much?
I guess my mistake was thinking of this as a character flaw instead of a skill.
Ultimately, we need more lawsuits, with the perp officers stripped of institutional protection and made to pay the damages out of their own pockets.
Unlawful detainment. Cops can lawfully detain someone only under the circumstances laid out by Bricker in this post.
The detainment of Watts does not fall into any of these categories. If you disagree, which of the categories described by Bricker does this detainment fall under?
…and Bricker isn’t a “random attorney on the internet”?
They did not have reasonable suspicion of a felony, only of a misdemeanor.
No, and…
…Fucking hell, no.
There is a bigger picture here that you’re both failing to see. Laws protecting your civil rights are important. They are not just a matter of principal, they are a matter of enforcement and protection from those who would violate them. It makes for a better society in general if cops aren’t seen as jackbooted fascists to be feared, mollified or obeyed at all costs. That’s not only good for citizens but for the cops themselves.
Who or what was “damaged” as a result of this encounter?
Yes. And I thought as much too, when I started posting in this thread. But Hentor set me right: a Terry stop cannot rest on a completed misdemeanor, unless the misdemeanor is a threat to public safety. That rule is set out in a Ninth Circuit case called United States v. Grigg, 498 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2007).
Bricker has cited established and applicable case law. You have not.
They had reasonable suspicion of a crime. It was not their responsibility at the time to determine what specific charge/s were viable.
They had reasonable suspicion of a misdemeanor. They did not have reasonable suspicion of a felony. That is not enough for detainment.