1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Ferguson / Staten Island Decisions -- No Indictments

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Boom_70, Nov 16, 2014.

  1. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    No, I said he courted death by resisting arrest, not selling illegal cigarettes.

    I have also indicated that I'm not sorry he is dead because he has been arrested 31 times, for various offenses, and that he should have known after 31 arrests not to resist police.
     
  2. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    For what it is worth, I am 99 percent certain that there is nothing illegal about resisting an unlawful arrest in New York State. In fact, you can legally use force to prevent yourself from being unlawfully arrested (for example, the cop has no warrant or probable cause for an arrest). Practically, it might not be the smartest thing to do, and I am not sure if anyone has even tried a case like that recently, but I personally like the small bit of sanity in the world that exists when our societal bent is that we are free people; we don't live under the thumb of the police whom we automatically obey like sheep.
     
  3. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    If you are gonna resist probably good to have some witnesses around or wait until
    the police have body camera's.
     
  4. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    The residents should just burn down the house so there is no stoop to stand on.
     
  5. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    To win that sort of case wouldn't be a matter of a witnesses of the actual arrest. If I am correct, it doesn't matter how you resisted, because the attempted arrest itself wasn't legal. It's a matter of the cop not being able to prove probable cause for the arrest in the first place. Cases get thrown out all the time over probable cause. This would have to be one of those cases, combined with a separate resisting arrest charge. How it gets handled in practice could be a crap shoot. If you had a cop with a broken jaw. ... you could end up right on the law, but wrong in the eyes of the police, a prosecutor and a sympathetic judge.

    But I doubt they actually prosecute any resisting arrest cases when the original charge gets thrown out over probable cause, which is why this never comes up. One of the things the cops have complained about in recent years is that they don't prosecute enough resisting arrest cases -- period. Even when the arrest was made WITH probable cause. The cops claim that their accused perps know the deal so they aren't afraid to resist. i.e. -- there is no consequence.
     
  6. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Without witnesses I would be worried about the police creating probable
    cause after the fact by perhaps placing drugs in the glove compartment
    of your car. Then they got ya. They'll drop the drug charge in return for
    accepting lesser offense of resiting arrest.
     
  7. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Justice from Chinese police makes NYPD look tame in comparison:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6zIIe5Ob6M&oref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dk6zIIe5Ob6M&has_verified=1
     
  8. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Ragu, I think you and Baron will both appreciate this segment from a recent This American Life episode about people who refuse to cooperate with Border Patrol Guards working inland check points:

    http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/540/a-front?act=2

    Debbie Nathan: I had to go through the checkpoints a lot on Interstate 10 or I-25. And I dutifully complied. I didn't joke around. I answered their questions. If they asked to look in the trunk, I popped the latch. I treated checkpoints like TSA screening at the airport. And then, about a year ago, I ran across this video on YouTube that made the checkpoints seem less like serious law enforcement and more like the sitcom Reno 911. It started with a guy in a red polo shirt filming himself as he rolls up to a checkpoint on Interstate 8 in California.

    Motorist: What's up, man?

    Border Patrol Agent: How you doing today, sir?

    Motorist: Good.

    Border Patrol Agent: Are you a US citizen?

    Motorist: That's my business.

    Border Patrol Agent: Well, it's our business to ask. Are you a US citizen or not?

    Motorist: You can ask. That's fine.

    Border Patrol Agent: And you have to answer me, or I'll have to detain you until you can either tell me that you're a US citizen.

    Motorist: Well, I don't have to answer you, because I have rights as an American.

    Border Patrol Agent: Sir, go ahead and pull over there behind that other vehicle, if you'd do me a favor.

    Motorist Nah, no thanks.

    Debbie Nathan: The video was called Top DHS Checkpoint Refusals. DHS, of course, stands for Department of Homeland Security, under which US Customs and Border Protection operates. Refusals means just what it says. I watched as one driver after another approached the border agents, greeted them politely, and then proceeded to be 100% uncooperative.

    http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/540/transcript
     
  9. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    That was a great episode.
     
  10. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    I can't read all of that right now. ... but yeah. I have never dealt with one of those checkpoints, but the same holds true for drinking & driving checkpoints. They can ask you anything they want. You don't have to answer -- you have to provide your license and registration. If they do the "pull over behind that area" thing, you can simply ask "Are you detaining me, or am I free to go?" If they are detaining you, they had better have probable cause -- something a checkpoint, which stops everyone regardless of whether they were observed breaking a law, can't satisfy. If they aren't detaining you, they have to let you go on your way. If they do detain you, you still don't have to answer their questions, and you have a right to an attorney.
     
  11. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    What's that line about being in a hole and ceasing to dig?
     
  12. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Problem is, when the non-local prosecutor reaches the same conclusion a few times in a row ...
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page