I really don’t think the Racine case is the same, though.
At any rate, I think the police will win this one, even though they shouldn’t.
I think we have just about exhausted the topic unless new info comes up.
Why do you think the Racine case is different? Did you read the entire article?
Why do you think the police will win this one? From what information have you deduced this? Or is that strictly your opinion based on your stellar comprehension of the law?
1. What basis was there to reasonably suspect that these gentlemen were felons, or
2. What basis was there to reasonably suspect that these gentlemen were acting disorderly
I'll take this as your concession that you have no actual facts or sound reasoning to back your opinion that the officers in this case were acting within the scope of their authority under the ID statute.