PDA

View Full Version : OT scenerio - want opinions



Titans74
04-07-2012, 11:25 PM
Here's is a scenerio. Based on what you are going to read answer the following questions.

1. Is "Mike" in the wrong? If so, for what?
2. Should "Mike" simply hope to have charges dropped or lowered to probation?
3. Does "Mike" have really good case for false arrest, assault, excessive force, police brutality etc?

I'll make the scenrio as short and direct as possible.

On night "Mike" is leaving a local bar. Mike's wife was there picking him up. Mike never drinks and drives. He either gets picked up by his wife, who does not drink, or he takes a cab. As he is aboit to get in his wifes car some random drunk female is in close proximity and behind the wheel of her car. This women stàrts hysterically screaming obscenities at Mike. Mike tells her to shut up which enrages the women. She jumps out of her car and runs straight at Mike, only to be held bad by onlookers. She them threatens to kill Mike by running him over. She returns to her car and revs the engine obnoxiously.

Mike does the only scensible thing, he calls 911 to report a drunk driver. Two officer arrive shortly and allow Mike and his wife to leave.

Moments later Mikes wife notices she is being followed by several cars. They appear to be police cars but no blue lights so she thinks nothing of it. Mimes wife pulls into a fast food oarking lot to hop out and grab Mike a late night snack.

As soon as the car is parked properly in a spot and is turned off, 4 cars full of police officers swarn Mike and his wife...both still seated in their car. Mind you....they were never pulled over. They pulled into a fast food place of their own accord. One officer somehow knows Mike by name and calls him by his name...demanding his ID. Mike, stating that he has comitted no crime, refuses to produce his ID. The officer then tells Mike he is under arrest for public intox. Mike again informs the officer that a) the officer hasn't conducted any test and has no proof that Mike is in fact intoxicated and b) Mike is sitting in his own car, not out and about in public.

Mime is then ordered out of the vehicle under the premise that the police are " conducting an investigation". Mike again refuses to step out of the vehicle because he won't walk into a pu lic intox charge.

At this time an officer reaches in Mikes window to unlock his door. Knowing that the law allows justified physical force to be used to fight an unlawful arrest, Mike pushed the officers hand away. This occured twice.

The two officers stepped back. Whispered to each other, stepped back towards the car and immediately, without warning, tasered Mike. Immediately Mike and his wife began yelling about Mikes heart condition. The officers were both telling to get out of the car an md for Mike to put his hands up. Neither offer attempted to open the door. Mikes's wife had to reach across him, getting a secondary tasing, and open the door.

After being handcuffed, the initial officer made some very vulgar, personal remarks about Mikes weight and asked "How do you like me now?"

After being placed in the patrol car Mike began feeling chest pains and severely dizzy and short of breath. The officer was asked 3 times to please call the EMT's. All 3 requests for medical personnel were denied.

Mike was transported to jail and charged with:

Felony assault on a police officer
Felony resisting arrest with violence
Disorderly conduct


No publc intox. And was released/ bonded out 2 hours later. He was not even held the manditory time for people who have been supposedly drinking.



What say you...is Mike in trouble or does he have enough to pursue a lawsuit for violation of his civil rights amongst other things?

jppopma
04-08-2012, 12:06 AM
Mike is in some trouble! Disorderly conduct is often the official charge for public intoxication. Mike will likely find out that his sober hindsight of the event is not quite the same as his drunken actions....(think of that drunk buddy thinking he is don juan hitting on women at the bar, and nobody can even understand what he is saying..)

To answer your questions....

1: Yes, disorderly conduct (aka, being loud or fighting in public, especially when drunk). resisting and obstructing police (pretty simple, police tell him what to do and he should do it -- drunken arguments and no understanding what is happening are not defenses). not sure on the felonious assault on police...if he used or threatened to use any weapon, that would cover that charge.

2: Mike can hope to have the charges combined and/or lowered. Though many courts will not plea down any charges with police as victims or resisting charges.

3: No, no, no, and no. Like i said, drunken recollection and what he "thought" was going on are likely not reality. If he reads the police report and /or views the police dash cameras, he may see alot of stuff that he doesn't remember or realize he was doing.


And since this is GUU...hope he wasn't getting drunk in a gamer!

commando
04-08-2012, 12:55 AM
Here in Oregon, based on what you have said, I believe Mike would have broken at least two laws, and possibly more. First, refusing to show identification to a peace officer (the circumstances do not matter, you are required to "show now" and may "complain later"). Second would be interfering with a peace officer (same principle, do as you're told now, file your grievance later).

These laws vary from state to state, but are generally similar. The oft-used "disorderly conduct" statute can usually be thrown into the mix in this type of scenario. If Mike doesn't agree to a plea deal and takes a jury trial, he'll have to hope his peers are sympathetic to his position, and not the police.

kesseldawg
04-08-2012, 10:06 AM
Mike did enough wrong that I don't think he has much of a case for his rights being violated and it's not going to be worth the money or time to fight it. The police have a great deal of discretion and power and Mike should have complied first and complained later. Showing ID could have avoided this whole thing (keep in mind that some states do not require you to carry ID, but you can still be detained by police until you can prove who you are). It seems like parts of this story don't exactly make sense (Mike got tasered and THEN was arguing with police? Police don't arrest you while you're sitting in your car, they arrest you when they have you under their control, which clearly her was not. Also how did they not have Mike's wife out of the car by now?).

As for resisting arrest, there is much written about it, and yes, people have rights against it, but not just when THEY feel like it. One can resist lawfully when there is an office "who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence..."

Mike should consider being apologetic for the trouble (not admitting any guilt, however) and if this is first time thing, perhaps a judge will be lenient. Juries are scary and cannot be trusted. Does Mike have a history of violence? Do the police know him for negative reasons? Short probation is not a big deal, and it seems like most of the charges could be dropped or reduced, but we'd need to know more about Mike and his history and why he decided not to comply with simple requests in the first place, remembering that this all started because Mike was drunk and yelled at a drunk woman. He didn't have to do that either. Be contrite, don't admit guilt, and let your lawyer do the talking. If you get emotional, you'll screw yourself more.

MSpecht
04-08-2012, 12:32 PM
Since this is a way OT thread, here is an interesting video I saw on YouTube the other day:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOJvPGTWxAU

This is a very very minor incident compared to the situation presented by the original poster, but the lessons are the same. A patrol officer can find himself or herself in a lightweight situation like this one, or a 'use of deadly force' situation in the blink of an eye. Depending on the length of time he/she has spent on the job, the responses may be quite different. That's why there are supervisors available to respond upon request, and the best patrol officers can quickly see when a SAM Unit should be called in. In general, follow the officer's directions, and fight over any illegal actions on the officer's part in court -- just make sure that it is you doing the fighting in court, not your family on behalf of your dumb dead ass.

halzeus
04-08-2012, 12:49 PM
I think Mike is in trouble and should lay off the booze for awhile.

xpress34
04-08-2012, 01:42 PM
First - I don't care how OT this thread is, it's way beyond what I would consider appropriate on a Sports Board.

That said, having spent time in the military and doing Loss Prevention, I'm not sure that any state says it's 'okay' not to carry ID.

In fact, in most every state, not being able to produce ID can get you arrested on vagrancy charges for not being able to prove who you are. it is the focal point for Stallone's character being arrested in First Blood. He had no ID and was arrested as a vagrant.

Beyond all of that, I am so tired of people in our society who because they 'think' or 'believe' they are in the right, disrespect Peace Officers and then cry when things get out of control.

If you get stopped, show respect and do as you're asked and as others have said, do your fighting in court. Fighting with and officer at the point of contact NEVER turns out well.

If you touch the officer in ANY way, you probably deserve what you are going to get.

Just my .02