Posted on 09/02/2021 6:43:49 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
Three police officers and two paramedics face charges of manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide, among others...
McClain was walking to a convenience store to purchase tea the night of Aug. 24, 2019, when someone called 911 to report a suspicious person. The three Aurora police officers contacted McClain as he returned home.
When McClain refused to stop walking, the officers tackled him to the ground, handcuffed him and used a carotid choke hold to block the flow of blood to his brain. Officers ignored McClain's pleas to leave him alone. Paramedics injected him with 500 mg of ketamine, a powerful sedative, before taking him to the hospital.
(Excerpt) Read more at police1.com ...
. From Riddle Law:
"Police can ask anyone for ID anytime and can ask to search someone’s bag anytime, without having to have a warrant, probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot."
2. A “Terry stop” (a brief investigatory stop) This second kind of police interaction involves a temporary detention. Not an arrest, but you are not free to walk away. This does require that the police have “reasonable suspicion.” It is not considered a “seizure” but is a temporary stop that is allowed when there is “articulable suspicion that a person has committed or is about to commit a crime.”
In other words, in some cases, the police can stop someone for purposes of investigating possible criminal behavior — even when there is no probable cause to make an arrest.
https://www.riddelllaw.com/when-can-police-question-me/
How much did that drugged up thug in Minn get when he died for resisting arrest? Wasn't it 27 MILLION handed to his family by the city he was killed in and scumbag politicians declared the cops GUILTY without even a trial taking place yet when they paid the taxpayers money to the family of the POS whose name I can't speak without gagging. So yeah, I think the minority types are ALWAYS looking to steal one way or the other. And why not since nothing is done about it. Do me a favor and take your whining pearl clutching twatty attitude someplace else where your hand wringing will gain sympathy
> “Police can ask anyone for ID anytime and can ask to search someone’s bag anytime, without having to have a warrant, probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot.” <
Well, yes. But the key word there is “ask”. Heck, anyone can ask anybody for anything. I, as a civilian, can go up to a stranger on the street and ask to see his ID. But I can’t demand it. And I sure can’t use force to get it.
Same goes with cops. The can ask. But they cannot demand or use force without probable cause.
I’m surprised that the medics were not required to get medical command approval.
“Police can ask anyone for ID anytime and can ask to search someone’s bag anytime, without having to have a warrant, probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot.”
True. And I can refuse. You can refuse. So can a kid wearing a mask.
Yet in the case of the kid wearing the mask the cops didn’t take no for an answer. So in truth they never ‘asked’ him anything and in fact were ordering him to produce ID and submit to whatever the hell else they wanted. All before they could be bothered to conduct even a cursory investigation.
By the way, there’s plenty of WHITE people making a living these days by refusing police ID demands and then suing them when they violate people’s rights.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+id+refusal
The police don’t have to take “no” for an answer. The kid was required to STOP when they asked him to and he did not. That was enough because he BROKE THE LAW!
I supplied a link. How about reading what is on the site instead of making excuses for the idiot kid who thought acting tough was a good idea.
Billy Boy, did you even bother watching the video? You seem to think this kid was some bench-pressing hardened thug from the Compton Bloods when he was an autistic, asthmatic, frail weird kid along the lines of Urkel.
I doubt that he ever ‘acted tough’ in his entire life.
But I suspect you have.
“The police don’t have to take “no” for an answer.”
Yes, sometimes they do. And if they don’t then that’s when they cross the line from being police to being the very “domestic enemies” they swore to oppose.
“Yes, sometimes they do.”
No they don’t when asking someone for ID. Why are you so thick? This individual was the cause of a call to 911 reporting suspicious activity. The police not only had the right but the duty to stop him.
The jerk kid thought setting himself up as a hero so he could tell his friends what a bad ass he was sounding like a good idea.
Didn’t work out for him. Maybe a few of the morons like this one will learn something but I doubt it.
> The police don’t have to take “no” for an answer. <
Absent probable cause, they sure do. And it’s even more than that. They also have to take silence for an answer. Please see my post #22.
By the way, this case is very different from the George Floyd case. The police had probable cause to detain Floyd, and even to use force. Floyd was suspected of passing a counterfeit bill.
But this guy was suspected of no crime.
Autistic? Asthmatic? And the cops knew this how? Should they have checked medical records? Oh wait, that’s right they COULDN’T do that because the kid wouldn’t even stop to talk to the cops.
Break the law, pay the price...case closed
Listen, I posted a link to a legal site that explains quite clearly what an individual can and cannot do.
It is crystal clear that the kid broke the law by refusing to stop and be questioned. Had he done that he could have legally refused to answer any questions but he chose to ignore the cops LEGAL order to stop.
Now go away, you lose.
And if Ashley Babbitt had not tried to climb through that window she'd be alive too. I guess you think her death was her fault as well?
All I know is how difficult it was to get through security into the WH and Capitol back in 2017 when I visited as a tourist.
Anybody who thinks it makes sense to “walk in” is missing something upstairs.
I followed your link from post #21, and read the whole thing (it was very interesting). In Parts 2 and 3 he talks about an individual’s rights when there is suspicion of a crime.
Part 1 talks about cases where there is suspicion, but no crime. From that part:
“Police can ask anyone for ID anytime and can ask to search someone’s bag anytime, without having to have a warrant, probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot.
“This is because in theory, the person can always refuse to provide information or say no to the search and walk away. These types of questions are allowed as long as the police don’t give the impression that you are required to answer.For example, as long as the police don’t make a show of force or authority.
“I say “in theory” because if a police officer in uniform approaches you and asks you a question, it is sometimes hard to know whether you are required to respond. But generally, if an officer walks up to you on the street without any reason to believe you have been involved in a crime, you are not required to answer his questions.”
I think that’s quite clear. No crime, no requirement to talk.
I NEVER said the kid had to talk. He DID have to stop when ordered.
From your post:
“But generally, if an officer walks up to you on the street without any reason to believe you have been involved in a crime, you are not required to answer his questions.”
But they did have a reason to be suspicious. They were acting on a 911 call of a suspicious character and were bound to check it out. And you don’t appear to want to address the fact that when a policeman orders you to stop, you stop. After that you may talk to him or not...that is the law.
“No they don’t when asking someone for ID. Why are you so thick?”
You’re the one who doesn’t understand that when the police ASK for ID they don’t have a right to it. They can request it but not demand it. Or do you not understand what “ask” means?
Colorado law allows police to stop you and demand ID only if they have reasonable and articulable suspicion that you have committed a specific crime. Meaning if they suspect you stole a goat they can stop you and ID you.
But just because a person is wearing PERFECTLY LEGAL CLOTHING is not reasonable suspicion that the person committed a crime because in this case wearing a mask is not a crime! Colorado law does NOT permit profiling people just because of what they wear. That would be a civil rights violation.
“Break the law, pay the price...case closed”
Indeed. And now three cops and two paramedics will pay the price for breaking the law.
Case closed.
> I NEVER said the kid had to talk. He DID have to stop when ordered. <
Oh, I see what you’re saying here. But that order to stop was not a lawful order. Sure, a cop can ask someone to stop. But he cannot order it without suspicion of a crime.
Yes, there was suspicious behavior here. But there was no suspicion of a crime.
Here’s an analogy. Let’s say you’re driving down a road. A cop cannot pull you over (stop you) unless he can articulate a crime that you might have committed - speeding, going through a red light, whatever. He cannot legally stop you just because something doesn’t feel right to him. There’s got be some possible crime.
I suppose we’ve reached an impasse here. These conversations are good, anyway. It gets everyone involved thinking a bit. And sometimes I even learn something (like from that article you posted).
“Oh, I see what you’re saying here. But that order to stop was not a lawful order.”
You know what? You just argue to argue and exhibit no common sense or any ability to comprehend the written word.
Go read what is at the link I supplied. We can debate another subject but I will no longer respond to you on this thread.
> Go read what is at the link I supplied <
Now I’m beginning to wonder if you read my post #34. Because I mentioned there that I read the whole article. It was very good.
> We can debate another subject but I will no longer respond to you on this thread. <
Yes, it’s probably a good idea that we both disengage. Sometimes spirited discussions devolve into personal attacks. That’s never a good thing.
So I too will withdraw from this thread. I’ve go to out and cut the grass anyway.
Regards,
LR
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.