You can feel free, but based on the cites, no one seems to dispute that he was in a public part of the skyway when the police arrived.
The police certainly did.
Yes. I’m looking for a cite that puts him on private property when the police arrived.
Who has one?
Cite?
The fact that they arrested him for trespassing on private property.
The authority-worshipping Smapti seems to be most beholden to his own rectum these days, considering the uncited and counterfactual (and quickly abandoned when challenged) nature of most of his posts lately.
That’s evidence that he was arrested, but not evidence of where he was when he was arrested – especially considering that the charges were dropped.
It’s clear that the charges weren’t dropped based on their merits.
No, it’s pretty clear that they were.
*After *the cops arrived and shoved him against a wall, certainly. But you might maybe see how the public would not be served by establishing a precedent of police officers manhandling random people, then charging them with disorderly conduct should they complain or curse. Kind of like they don’t get to punch a guy in the face then arrest him for assaulting a police officer and breaking the officer’s hand with his cheekbone.
Well, maybe *you *wouldn’t, come to think of it. But you’re a fascist idiot. It is known.
Cite that they were dropped based on their merits?
Already been cited – the statement of the St. Paul City Attorney.
The St. Paul City Attorney made no such statement.
Yes she did. She said “Our job as prosecutors is to determine whether those elements of a crime are present to prove to a jury, and we just didn’t have that here.” They didn’t have the elements of the crime present to prove to a jury. So they were dropped on their merits.
“We didn’t think we could prove it to a jury” is not synonymous with “the charge was meritless”. The city of Los Angeles couldn’t prove to a jury that OJ Simpson was a murderer - does that mean there was no merit to the charge?
Or maybe you think OJ was just a kind innocent guy who the police decided to hassle because he was black.
It means its merits were not sufficient – therefore it was dropped, based on its merits.
No, it means they didn’t think they could get a conviction, presumably because the defense would have relied on uncertainty and conjecture about exactly where the suspect was standing, much as you now are.
Because of its merits. Insufficient merits. It was dropped on its merits.
No one has disputed where he was standing. The police have not disputed Lollie’s statements about where was standing.
Nope.