Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

LEOs, what would you have done?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by The Rabbi, Jun 28, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. The Rabbi

    The Rabbi member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,535
    Location:
    TN
  2. Steve in PA

    Steve in PA Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,574
    Location:
    NE PA
    So, he was told to step back (a lawful order) and not interfere, which he did not. Then he supposedly reached through the window and grabbed the officers shirt to get his name and badge number. Subsequenlty the officer decided to arrest the man and the man resisted. They struggled and the man was eventually arrested. As for the "supposed" medical condions, didn't stop hiim from arguing with the officer did it? So exactly what rights were violated?

    1) He could have stepped back away from the car/officer. He had no business sticking his nose into the traffic stop.

    2) He reached out and grabbed the officers shirt, supposedly to get his name/badge. Every PD I know of requires an officer to provide this information when asked. There was no need for him to put his hands on the officer.

    3) He apparently was told he was going to be arrested and resisted. What should the officer have done, let him go?

    4) He has a "heart condition", but didn't immediately go to the hospital to be checked out, instead he waited until the next day (Monday). Hmmmm.
     
  3. The Rabbi

    The Rabbi member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,535
    Location:
    TN
    Steve in PA, if you're looking for an argument from me you'll need to go elsewhere. I agree 100%. You assault an officer you get whats coming.
     
  4. Spreadfire Arms

    Spreadfire Arms Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,312
    not to mention it would have been on any written warning that may have been issued by the officer, if they give those out in writing instead of verbally. :(

    oops sorry im not current LE....should i have responded to this thread? sorry.
     
  5. BostonGeorge

    BostonGeorge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Salem, NH
    I would just like to point out, as the LEO apologizers are often quick to do, that only one side of the story, the officer's, is represented in this piece.

    However, if that's what really took place (and everything that happened), the Rabbi got exactly what he had coming to him.
     
  6. GunGoBoom

    GunGoBoom member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,645
    Wrong. Just because a PD "requires" an officer to do it, doesn't mean they're necessarily going to follow the policies. Some officers are rogues - I've seen it before. As for it being written on the ticket, that's a joke too....I've gotten more than one ticket where the officer's number or name is written is such poor handwriting it's completely illegible.

    Arrested for what? Assault? That ain't assault to try to look at a badge, I don't think, if the officer refuses to give the badge number, *if* that's what in fact happened. And therefore, it is LEGAL to resist an unlawful arrest. Not all 'touches' are assaults. That's the key, is was there or was there not an assault? If there was not, then he cannot be guilty of resisting arrest or obstructing justice, because it is legal to resist an unlawful arrest.

    just pointin out...I'm not saying that he had any right to interfere just because it was his niece - maybe he did not - I'm just playing the devils advocate a little bit, for amusement purposes. Come to think of it, if he really had no right to request a badge number as not being the detainee, then perhaps that could make the arrest justified - I dunno. But I certainly would not be at all surprised if the officer refused to tell the guy his badge number (whether rightly or wrongly per dept. policies, since he wasn't the detainee), based on my history with the ultra arrogant attitude of certain bad apples in that profession. But it comes down to whether or not an "assault" occurred, as that is specifically defined by state law.
     
  7. Pilgrim

    Pilgrim Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,957
    Location:
    Nevada, escaped from the PDRK via Idaho.
    I don't know. It is hard to say.

    I lived in New Jersey at the Naval Air Engineering Center at Lakehurst back in 1976-1978. I was twenty-eight years old. I was rather astounded at the antics senior citizens got away with because they were, well, senior.

    Shortly after arriving in Lakehurst, I took my wife to the Ocean County mall to buy curtains and curtain rods for our quarters in base housing. After parking our pickup truck, a senior man drove up and berated me for taking his parking place. He had had his eye on the open space near the store, but was delayed in taking it because of another senior citizen driver who blocked his approach while trying to park her car. The fellow looked to be in his sixties and "by God I should go back and vacate the parking space" so he could have it. The fellow acted like he was willing to fight me right then and there for showing him such disrespect.

    Inside the store my wife and I were talking to the salesperson about the curtains when another senior, a woman, pushed her way between my wife and I and demanded to be waited upon. The salesperson said afterwards that it happens all the time.

    I am familiar with the Lakewood area, along with Manchester Township. There are/were a large number of retirement communities along the highways. The senior drivers were terrible. One of their common acts was to pull on to the two lane highway dangerously close in front of drivers, drive one block at 25 mph in a 55 mph zone, then turn back into the retirement community. My wife asked a Manchester Township cop on the CB radio who witnessed this act pulled right in front of her if he was going to do anything about it. The cop answered back that it did no good to cite the senior drivers. They went to court, pulled a "poor senior citizen act" in front of the judge, and invariably the judge let them off with a warning.

    Back then seniors renewed their drivers licenses providing a doctor's note saying that they met all the medical requirements necessary to be a safe driver. A rash of traffic accidents involving seniors caused the department of motor vehicles to decide to at least give vision checks to the renewing seniors in spite of the doctor's certificates. You never saw such a s--t storm as the one raised by the seniors. The department went ahead with requiring a vision test in front of a DMV employee and a number of doctors were suddenly in trouble for signing off their patients as safe to drive when in fact they couldn't see.

    I can certainly see a senior in New Jersey getting in a cop's face thinking he was "senior bullet proof" and ending up going to jail.

    Pilgrim
     
  8. Pilgrim

    Pilgrim Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,957
    Location:
    Nevada, escaped from the PDRK via Idaho.
    A battery is unlawful contact by one person on the person of another. If I have not given you permission to touch me and you do so, that is a battery. Some states call it an assault. California differentiated between assault, which is an attempt to commit a battery, and the actual contact, which is a battery.

    For those of you who don't remember your school yard fights, they didn't usually start as a knock down, kick butt fight. They started with pokings, pushing, shoving, grabbing, then the punches and kicks. An officer is foolish to let any contact get past the initial touch. He had better put a stop to it right now.

    When I worked the streets, it was my experience that any one who touched me was testing me to see how I would react. It was very important to make it perfectly clear that the next time the person touched me he or she was going to jail. That put the responsibility on them to decide if they wanted to go to jail or settle the matter peacefully.

    As far as my name and badge number was concerned, if it looked like someone was making a big show of trying to read my badge or name plate, I told them very clearly what my name is and what my badge number is. The citation, if they were getting one, would have both written down. If they desired, I would give them my business card with all the information they wanted.

    In California it is not 'legal' to resist an unlawful or false arrest. One is only justified in resisting if the officer is using excessive force to affect the arrest. If you get it in your head to resist an arrest you think is false and are wrong, in all probability your attorney will suggest you take whatever deal the district attorney offers because you will spend some time in jail.

    Pilgrim
     
  9. Spreadfire Arms

    Spreadfire Arms Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,312
    gungoboom wrote:

    well just because the handwriting may be illegible doesn't mean the PD can't look it up by the serial number on the form, or the radio traffic where the officer used his callsign to indicate a traffic stop on a particular license plate and a given location at a specific time of day.

    i hardly think an officer can leave absolutely no trail whatsoever that someone couldn't file a complaint on an officer given the time of day, location, and license plate of the vehicle if the writing was illegible.

    your turn to refute this...... :confused:
     
  10. Steve in PA

    Steve in PA Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,574
    Location:
    NE PA
    "Steve in PA, if you're looking for an argument from me you'll need to go elsewhere. I agree 100%. You assault an officer you get whats coming."

    Sorry Rabbi, I didn't mean for my response to sound that way.

    "Assault" may have been the wrong term to use in this case. In PA an assault would require an attempt to cause or intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causing bodily injury to another.

    However, it would meet the requirements for "harassment", subjecting another to physical contact. Its a lesser offense, but the person would still be arrested none the less.

    Now maybe in the state where this took place his actions could be considered an assault, I don't know. Either way he was told he was under arrest.
     
  11. GunGoBoom

    GunGoBoom member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,645
    Pilgrim and spreadfire, you may be right - probably are. But why should you have to hire a lawyer to file a case, in order to get a judge to order the PD to tell you what officer it was, just because the officer refused to tell you the number and he's not forced to write legibly? Cuz I know what would probably happen.... You walk into the station, and announce that you want to fill out a complaint on an officer for x,y, or z alleged bad acts. OK, sir, here's the form. First thing on the form is officer's name and or badge number. Sorry, sir, we cannot accept the form or investigate without this filled out completely so we know what officer it was. But I can't read the ticket - can you look it up for me? I can describe him, here's the ticket number, date and location it was issued, etc. Sorry, no can do. Go see a judge if you want that info. Not part of our SOP to look up stuff like that. Wouldn't be at all surprised, given how many beauracracies operate. But Pilgrim, you're right, a battery or 'assault' can be an unwanted touching of any kind in some jurisdictions, but not sure about all of them. It might have to be a potentially injurious or provocative unwanted touching in others - dunno. And in my state, the law DOES allow one to resist an unlawful arrest, 99% sure.
     
  12. chaim

    chaim Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,412
    Location:
    Columbia, MD
    I'm of course not a cop, but I do know Lakewood well enough that I will comment (I know a few people in yeshiva there, and I've been there in the past).

    We don't know that is what happened. That is what the cops say happened, we don't have the whole story. I find it very doubtful that a Rosh Yeshiva in Lakewood laid hands on a cop. If it did happen this way, I do agree 100%, but we really don't know.


    I will comment on Lakewood and the relationship with the Orthodox Jews there and everyone else.

    There is a lot of tension between the Orthodox and non-Orthodox communities. 20-30 years ago Orthodox Jews made up a very small percentage of the town. Today they are at least 50% of the population with the political strength that goes with that. The majority of the city council is made up of Orthodox Jews. Many of the long-time residents aren't happy with the change in their town. Many of the non-Orthodox newcomers aren't happy with what they see as undue influence by the Jews at what they see as coming at the expense of their ethnic group.

    Many of the Jews of Lakewood have experienced harrassment from some thugish members of the other communities (thugs of course being the exception, but common enough that many people have had experiences). Also, as the article alludes to (and the police deny) there have been quite a few instances of the police in Lakewood harrassing the Jews there.

    On the other end, a Rosh Yeshiva is used to being treated with respect (his position is somewhat analagous with a Bishop or Archbishop in the Catholic Church). It is very possible that he didn't like the way the policeman treated him. I doubt very much that he put hands on the policeman, but I don't doubt that he didn't act like a serf either. He may well have stood his ground and even assert his perceived rights. It has been my experience that quite a few police officers have the same outlook, they expect to be treated with deference. Both men probably spoke to the other in a way where they expected to be the one treated as the "alpha male" and neither probably backed down. Few police officers I've met react well to that kind of situation.

    My guess, knowing Lakewood, and with only the policeman's account, is that likely both were at fault for what happened (both likely let their egos get the best of them).
     
  13. richyoung

    richyoung Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    495
    Location:
    lawton, Oklahoma

    Wrong. It is legal to resist a false arest anywhere in the United States, courtesy of the Supreme Court. See John Bad Elk vs. United States - “At common law, if a party resisted arrest by an officer without warrant, and who had no right to arrest him, and if in the course of that resistance the officer was killed, the offence of the party resisting arrest would be reduced from what would have been murder, if the officer had the right to arrest, to manslaughter . . . f the officer have no right to arrest, the other party might resist the illegal attempt to arrest him, using no more force than was absolutely necessary to repel the assault constituting the attempt to arrest.”

    SCOTUS talking - last I heard, they have the final say in the matter.


    ONly if said attorney is ignorant of the law.
     
  14. MikeIsaj

    MikeIsaj Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    878
    Location:
    North of the City of Brotherly Love, West of The P
    Some random thoughts on the subject in no particular order...

    Keep your hands to yourself! That's what I remember learning in first grade.

    "Don't touch and you won't be touched", that's what we tell the inmates.

    When you reach into a police car, common sense says that bad things will soon happen to you.

    "A Rosh Yeshiva is used to respect." Well my friends, you have to be respectful in order to warrent any respect being given. Do not treat me with contempt and disrespect and then cry because I do not treat you properly.

    For all the LEO bashers; I work with FBI, U.S. Marshals, State Troopers, Sheriffs and Municipal Officers. They are overall professionals that respect the law they uphold. Of course there are a few idiots but, they are the slim minority. If you constantly have trouble with LEO's, I'd take a look in the mirror for the cause.

    The Pa. Crimes code, ss504 Use of Force in Self Protection, (b), (1) The use of force is not justifiable under this section: (i) to resist an arrest which the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, although the arrest is unlawful

    I suspect there is more to the Supreme Court decision cited.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2005
  15. TheFederalistWeasel

    TheFederalistWeasel member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    Messages:
    796
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Actually the current doctrine which the courts including the Supreme Court holds is that fact that one can only use an necessary level of force to over come a level of force in any unlawful arrest.

    What this means is this…

    If I come to arrest you and tell you its time to go to jail and you believe that I have no grounds for the arrest and you resist violently against me and kill me then congratulations my friend you are going to jail for murder.

    The only force I was using was verbal, and you reacted violently.

    A recent case discussed here involved an agency close to mine…

    http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=127339

    So basically you resist you take your lives into your own hands as well as your freedom, think before you act.

    The roadside is not the place to fight the cops that is what the courts are for because you WILL lose that fight on the side of the road guaranteed and you might even lose your life as well.
     
  16. richyoung

    richyoung Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    495
    Location:
    lawton, Oklahoma
    Supreme Court sez manslaughter - read the cite from that decision...

    ...suppose I just don't go. What happens then? You just walk away?

    A
    The case you reference involved officers with probable cause to make an arrest - such has not been adjudicated here - apples and oranges...

    If the law enforcement officer is not authorized in his actions by law, I'll resist at the point of offence - the minute the LEO steps outside of the law, (including hte Constitution), he is no more acting under its authority than I am. Did you read the excerpt I posted?
     
  17. richyoung

    richyoung Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    495
    Location:
    lawton, Oklahoma

    ....and in a conflict betwen Pa. law and the Supreme Court's decisions, which do you think over-rules the other?
     
  18. TheFederalistWeasel

    TheFederalistWeasel member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    Messages:
    796
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Here is the whole quote you excerpted and here is a link from (most likely the website you took it from.

    http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/lsotherside1.htm


    Now you say apples and oranges to which I reply it’s your life my friend, who do you think my backup is going to believe when they arrive?

    Furthermore this cite limits itself to speculation [at best] narrowly focused upon a defective warrant or one issued w/o probable cause, in which case the charge you will face will be no more than manslaughter, which lends to the facts that even the USSC acknowledges in resisting even what on its face could be an unlawful arrest you can and would most likely still face criminal prosecution, just not for murder.

    This case is from 1900, lets move forward to a more recent case handled by the Courts

     
  19. GunGoBoom

    GunGoBoom member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,645
    Nope, not always. Usually, but not always. I've seen plenty o' dash videos and such where officer loses fight; suspects get away; officer may or may not be hurt or dead (regardless of whether the resistance was lawful - it's usually not of course). So it's not guaranteed. But if you mean to say that it ain't real wise to fight with the po po, you got that straight.
     
  20. BostonGeorge

    BostonGeorge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Salem, NH
    What if I'm holding Kryptonite?
     
  21. The Rabbi

    The Rabbi member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,535
    Location:
    TN
    This is why I addressed the query to LEOs. What would you do if someone came over and grabbed at your shirt through the car window, even if that person were a dignified 65 year old man?
     
  22. AK-74me

    AK-74me Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2005
    Messages:
    339
    I agee with MikeIsaj anytime you reach into a patrol car after an officer and it is not to pat him on the back to tell him good job, you deserve what is coming to you.
     
  23. TheFederalistWeasel

    TheFederalistWeasel member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    Messages:
    796
    Location:
    Tennessee
    The same thing I did when a punk 15-year-old kid I was dealing with nutted up and hit me while dealing with him on a juvenile domestic call. He approached me like a man ready to fight, presented himself to me stated he was going to beat my white ass black and blue and took the first swing.

    I aggressively introduced him to the floor face first, cuffed him and stuffed him into the back of my patrol car, charged him with Felony Obstruction, Terroristic Threats and Acts and Simple Battery as well as Simple Assault under the states Family Violence Act.

    I can take all the verbal abuse in the world and I feel that is fair game and to be expected in my line of work, it’s nothing personal, in all likelihood I’ve never met you before answering that call for service which placed us together or made that traffic stop.

    But once you cross that line and place your hands on me, or my Brother and Sister officers then it becomes personal.
     
  24. The Rabbi

    The Rabbi member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,535
    Location:
    TN
    Works for me.
     
  25. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    Sorry, but age doesn't matter, actions do, and anyone that feels like they can grab me without some legal justification to do so is most definitely NOT dignified. I don't care whether we're talking about a rabbi, priest, another cop, a nun, or a school teacher. IF the account of his actions are true and correct, he was far from dignified.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page