The whole thing will be thrown out. But with an official complaint, doesn’t Dr. Dre have the right to know the name of his accuser?
If he deems this an “arrest” he could also be sued for false arrest.
FOIA the 9-1-1 call. etc. etc. ...
It’s not uncommon for someone to be handcuffed after a report of a gun, he wasn’t arrested.
would appear to be manufactured news per the article.
If you are the police it is dammed if you do and dammed if you don’t
Nope, AA billionaires dont be breakin’ no laws ..
What I note here (and I am NOT a Dr. Dre fan - whoever he is) is that a rich and clearly INTELLIGENT black man cooperated, was not shot, and was released.
Now he is back to whatever it is he does all day long, rather than involved with this stupidity
Though not applicable in this case, gangs sometimes use a street technique of a gun caddy who is underage, who keeps and provides an illegal gun when needed.
If the caddy is arrested, he tells the police that he found the gun, gets some time in the juvenile justice system, then is handsomely compensated. But if an adult gang member needs the gun, it is right there and available on demand. After use, it is returned to the caddy.
In some circumstances, guns have been used in several shootings, by different adults in different places, giving the others good alibis if they are arrested or searched.
Again, this doesn’t fit this particular situation. But Dre should know better, and sent an employee to drive off the pest, instead of placing himself at risk.
Where the heck is his HEAD?
The article mentions that Dre said the accuser and he had been involved in a “road rage” incident before this, and that’s why (it’s implied) the man parked there in the way of Dre’s driveway. Perhaps he thought the cell phone pointed at him was a gun, or perhaps there was a gun brandished during the road rage incident. Either way, that was some silliness involved, and Dre did well to be calm and cooperative, lest he be arrested and investigated for the road rage incident. Sure, he might get released after police “clear it up,” but he could be beaten or killed while in custody (by other arrestees) awaiting his release, etc., plus, why go through that nonsense? I don’t personally like the handcuff part, but that comes down to officer discretion and departmental policy, so I hope the officer was reasonable and followed policy. That policy can always be challenged and changed.
It would be nice if the propagandist writing this article took a moment to research the law on this. Cops in California are required by law to accept citizen’s arrests. To refuse to do so would place the cop in violation of the law. At one time, cops were required to book on a citizen’s arrest but now they have the option of taking the most appropriate enforcement action based on the information provided. In this case it sounds like they released him pursuant to 849B of the California Penal Code which says there isn’t enough evidence to proceed with the arrest. The cops are only the custodians, the person making the arrest is responsible.
FYI
I happen to know Andre Young and have for many many years, HE NEVER GOES ANYWHERE without ARMED SECURITY. I didn’t look at the video but you can be guaranteed he had his Armed Security with him. At the very least they were in the House, just Like they Always are at all of his homes.
Misdemeanor brandishing of a firearm, in California?
This all sounds like baloney. I’m sure his thoroughly competent lawyers will settle this if they haven’t already.