Student supressed by goose stepping police gets no ADDITIONAL charges

[Wezil]

Stronger tasers.

[Riesstiu IV]

Is "goose stepping" the new "aggressors?"

[Wezil]

It's code for fascist America.

[Riesstiu IV]

*head explodes*

[Dauphin]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Student supressed by goose stepping police gets no ADDITIONAL charges

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
The complex one is that it's generally a question of law to be settled after the fact as to whether there's a valid purpose for arrest. You open the can of worms for everyone to apply their creative interpretation as to whether they had a "valid" reason for resisting.

The "reasonable person" test is fairly standard in many law jurisdictions. Would a reasonable person have considered their actions to be unquestionably acceptable. If a plonker things up some random "valid" reason that the average Joe thinks is complete toss, then it is not a valid reason.

The simpler one is what level of "resistance" would be legal? Presumably the Doc Holliday option would be out, but what would you meaningfully allow as "legal" resistance?

I'm assuming the reference Doc Holliday is Tombstone, (I had in my mind a film with Michael J Fox for some reason). Why assume the ability for any kind of self-defence can not be agreed upon within a legal framework. You can, after all, start from the other end of the spectrum to the OK Corral - let's say running from an officer is not a crime and see where we go from there.

[Kidlicious]

I think it's pretty ****ed up that they actually charged him with anything after they held him down and electroshocked him.

Maybe they should get similar treatment.