My only point is that we don't have all the facts here, and that there ARE possible justifications for this other than just "police state".
On the one hand, somebody's got to figure out a way to protect idiots.
On the other hand, people who report a crime, get somebody else arrested, and then go back on their word should have SOME consequences for that act.
I agree 100%. People who use the criminal justice system as a tool to manipulate other people really piss me off.
As for this DA, check out this quote from the story: She defended her decision to arrest the victim, saying “I would rather have to explain why she was arrested than why she was dead.”
She's not all that worried about the woman, she's more afraid of having to explain herself later if something bad happens. This is a terrible character flaw!
Why?
On the other hand, people who report a crime, get somebody else arrested, and then go back on their word should have SOME consequences for that act.
Um, aren't both of the above the same hand, since both are justifications for the state's action in this case?
Way too much nanny state for me. No thanks.
“On the one hand, somebody’s got to figure out a way to protect idiots.”
And why is that? That’s the same reasoning the nannies use for all their laws and regulations. If I want to do something idiotic, leave me the f*&k alone, it’s not your business.