" The Orem police officer, as yet unnamed by city officials, cited Perry for violating a city ordinance with her "sadly neglected and dying landscape," which resembles dry hay. It was a city ordinance and his job is to give tickets for anyone breaking a city ordinance, like it or not. Take it to the city council, they make the ordinances.
When Perry refused to give her name and tried to walk inside to call her son, the officer tried to arrest her, police say. According to a police news release, while she was struggling, she tripped and fell on her doorstop, cutting open the bridge of her nose.
She refused to give he name and walked away. All she needed to do was take the ticket and go see the court clerk or the city judge,and tell her story.
It got out of hand I admit but you can't assume it was all the cops fault. I think they were both In the wrong.
Why doesn't her son come over once a week and take care of his mothers yard?
Believe me, not all little old ladies are sweet. I think maybe her attitude may have had a lot to do with this situation getting to the level it did.I don't like her playing the age card either. Poor Thaaang!
Methinks you need a REAL history lesson. Look at some of the court cases in the early US out of Mass, Conn, New Hampshire, New York, etc.
CITIZENS took the state to court constantly over unconstituional ordinances, and continually resisted authority that was unlawful. They had just -ahem- FOUGHT A WAR for their rights, and weren't about to listen to some lying, stupid crap about having a "bad attitude" toward the law. OF COURSE they had a bad attitude. They understood that the nature of civil authority is to expand itself until it crushes freedom. When it does, it is always applauded by some nitwit who will cluck and say "he had it coming to him. You have nothing to fear if you do nothing wrong."
Sorry, but it's attitudes like yours that allows stuff like this to happen. Even if they are both "wrong", the LEO's actions are much more problematic as he is the guy with the badge, handcuffs and gun.
Whether the woman here had an attitude is irrelevant to the situation as she can't arrest or handcuff the officer. The woman has no authority here, the LEO has all the authority here and he abused it. He arrested a woman merely because, in his opinion, she wasn't compliant enough. The fact that you don't seem to understand the difference here is disturbing.