My Presumption not reported: Police were called to act on a report of a man with a gun. Or they saw the holster and presumed a gun was either on the person or near by (fallen out of holster?).
Why do I presume so? I first give the benefit of the doubt for action being taken for most people (not just LEO). Otherwise, I have to believe in a sort of activist conspiracy that drove the officers to act on their own with the intent of “making and example” or “infringing on the rights” of someone to “teach them a lesson.” If this is the case, the police should be arrested.
My opinion is that the officers likely had a reason (maybe not a good or reliable one) to investigate the man with the holster as a violation of the law could be in progress. Detaining the student briefly to make sure he did not break the law would have been in order under the premise he had a gun. Following a quick search and taking a statement from the student that he wore the holster without a gun as a form of protest should have prompted the return of all his belongings and immediate release.
The police were wrong for detaining him any longer than that. Anything more is infringement on the students rights and the LEOs overstepped their authority. The University is wrong for even taking a position against free speech.
I'm confused in the story about the police turning a report over to the university. No crime was committed. What are they reporting to the university and why does the university care. Thus a case for a civil lawsuit is justified in my opinion. I don't think the police involved should be hung or shot without a trial. But they should certainly be investigated.
Their actions indicate to me that they clearly understand that the University wants these people to be intimidated, that it wants the protests/exercise of free speech suppressed.
At the site, it is reported that the student now faces possible charges of academic misconduct.
That is not the same as actual charges... we need to see what the University does at this point.