Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: This Just In

“’Sir, I’m going to ask you one last time, then I’m going to take you into custody. Do we understand each other?’, the officer said.”

Perhaps you know. Obviously, the photographer was not in custody when the officer said this. So was the photographer free to go? Is there a third disposition between ‘in custody’ and ‘free to go’?


18 posted on 06/02/2011 10:47:16 AM PDT by swain_forkbeard (Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: swain_forkbeard

Well, it depends. For instance, when Fussell was first confronted, if he had said he has the right to leave, and proceeding to vacate the premises, this may have given the MTA officers an excuse to detain him for “attempting to flee”. We’ll never know, but it is conceivable.

Fussell may have been “free to go”, but he may not have believed he could.

Finally, why should he leave? He’s a taxpaying citizen. The officers are working for him, and Fussell has every right to be at the light rail station. After all, as a taxpaying, he’s part owner. Fussell wasn’t braking any laws, and was simply taking photos.

In this country, we are presumed INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. It’s not the other way around, but many in law enforcing believe otherwise.

I salute Fussell for his courage and convictions.


19 posted on 06/02/2011 11:05:29 AM PDT by This Just In (In America, RINO's belong in zoo's, not public office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson