Just heard on the radio news that the boyfriend is being charged too.
I rather suspect they wouldn’t have bothered if she’d have been more cooperative with the police. A perfect example of reaping what you sow.
It’s possible that they’re ticked at her accusations and want to have the facts come out.
That said, I thought someone upthread quoted the police as saying no crime was committed. (Unless I’m confusing that with the Brown/Johnson case.)
If she had just shut the fuck up, this never would have happened. No handcuffs, no arrest, nothing.
I think that happened because she tried to go after the cop. They might have let it go, but then her charge of racism has more credibility.
This is why you cooperate with the police and if you have a grievance with how they interacted with you you go to court and sue them for $20 million.
I believe the police said that the police didn’t actually see the crime. Apparently, one or more witnesses have come forward to press charges.
Maybe someone objects to Watts dogging in public and then speaking at the Gould Law School on Oct 22, 2014. Something about “Race, Sexual Expression, and Civil Rights Law: A conversation with Daniele Watts” (or how false claims of racism can restart your acting career).
Well, it seems this particular lying whore has been charged with lewd conduct.
Well Amberlei Is F’ing your husband while black, publicly for all to see in a car OK?
Legal, no. Entertaining, yes.
1,400 posts, the vast majority saying what a complete violation of the civil rights of two innocent snowflakes by jack booted American Nazis police officers just for asking for ID, and now that the other shoe drops . . . nothing.
How we roll here at the 'Dope I guess 
I think we’re all shocked that the LAPD has decided to spend taxpayer money on 1-month old nonsense.
I think there’s an interesting conflict here. It appears that, legally, the cop didn’t have the right to detain and ID Watts. However, legally, they can still press charges. Charges that would have been impossible to press if Watts hadn’t been detained and ID’d.
How do we resolve the idea that one can be charged with a crime, but the policeman at the scene cannot arrest or even detain you for identification purposes?
After her accusations and protestations (“We were doing *nothing *wrong!”) I really can’t blame them…
No we’re not.
Sure you can. Cops shouldn’t be wasting time and money on petty crimes just to get back at someone who embarrassed them.
But if their intent is to show the lengths they are willing to go just to punish someone for lawfully refusing a request, they are doing a great job at that.
And, in the American system of jurisprudence, we believe them. It seems that if LAPD had evidence to support a charge of lewd conduct, they would have arrested them on the spot.
People coming forward with evidence days/weeks/a month later smells of a manufacturing process to me.
You are kidding, right? People were posting those pictures while this was all going on, and it was a report of lewd conduct that got the police down there in the first place. I don’t agree with the police pursuing this at this time, but it’s ridiculous to purport some sort of manufacturing process about all of this if you had been following along at all with events.
No, i don’t agree that charges would have been impossible to press without detaining Watts. In fact, that factor is one that the Grigg decision mentions specifically: how easy would it be to identify the offender? In this case, the police had the car and its license plate; they could certainly identify at least one of the offenders by following that lead. And at least theoretically, they can compel him to reveal the name of his partner following his conviction.
Please cite that the decision to charge her was made by the police.
Regards,
Shodan