• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Charges dismissed in Arizona Iced Tea arrest outside Fayetteville liquor store

WCH said:
There are laws against consuming alcohol of any sort in the parking lot of a place that sells alcohol. Since this cop was an alcohol enflrcement officer, he had the right to ask.
Click to expand...


Wrong, he had no right to ask, and no right to arrest as determined by the courts.



Secondly he gave the perp an opportunity to leave and he refused. This goes directly back to what I first stated
Click to expand...

"perp"?

Cooperation and compliance ....it's served me well for 50 + years.
Click to expand...



You would let some dude without a badge put you in handcuffs?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
and here we go.... lol


1. he had no badge, if it was me, and I wasn't carrying at the time, I'd choke his ass out.

2. Why is it put on the citizen to be the professional, shouldn't the police have thicker skin to deal with the public than the public should have dealing with the police?


This cop was out of his gourd, no badge, a pair of handcuffs, are you suggesting we should comply with strangers claiming to be cops and let them handcuff you?


Would you reccommend this tactic for women late at night in parking lots?
Click to expand...

The cop was undercover alcohol enforcement but, he should have shown his badge.

Be glad it wasn't you.

As I say later, there are law about drinkng in the parking lots places that sell or serve.

Women should ask for another officer to be ln scene and never tell the cop to ****off ( this wasn't at night)
 
WCH said:
There are laws against consuming alcohol of any sort in the parking lot of a place that sells alcohol. Since this cop was an alcohol enflrcement officer, he had the right to ask.

Secondly he gave the perp an opportunity to leave and he refused. This goes directly back to what I first stated

Cooperation and compliance ....it's served me well for 50 + years.
Click to expand...

He gave the guy an opportunity to leave, when he wasn't trespassing or doing anything wrong? Are... are.. you being serious? Or is this a joke? I didn't know we needed police permission to stand in a parking lot and drink ice tea.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
You would let some dude without a badge put you in handcuffs?
Click to expand...

This is where the logical progression of giving so much power to cops leads. First, we are told to cooperate with cops in uniforms. Okay, done. Then, it's guys in civilian clothes flashing a badge. Now, it's guys who don't even need to flash a badge.
 
WCH said:
The cop was undercover alcohol enforcement but, he should have shown his badge.
Click to expand...

He didn't, and therefore it would have been justifiable had the gentleman beat the ever loving **** out of the cop.


Be glad it wasn't you.
Click to expand...


Why not? I am of means and capability to handle both the circumstances of an individual claiming to be a cop with no badge and to pay for the attorneys afterwords for my self defense of the matter.


As I say later, there are law about drinkng in the parking lots places that sell or serve.
Click to expand...

And? he was drinking an iced tea.


Women should ask for another officer to be ln scene and never tell the cop to ****off
Click to expand...


So are you reccommending the woman comply or not comply with the unbadged officers orders?
 
Hatuey said:
This is where the logical progression of giving so much power to cops leads. First, we are told to cooperate with cops in uniforms. Okay, done. Then, it's guys in civilian clothes flashing a badge. Now, it's guys who don't even need to flash a badge.
Click to expand...



I am thinking about this, could you imagine any new yorker falling for a dude claiming to be a cop with no badge? come on.//
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Wrong, he had no right to ask, and no right to arrest as determined by the courts.





"perp"?





You would let some dude without a badge put you in handcuffs?
Click to expand...

I already said the officer should have proxuced a badge but, am I going to shoot hkm? Hell no. Besides it was being filmed and there were many witnesses so, quit making assumptions.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I am thinking about this, could you imagine any new yorker falling for a dude claiming to be a cop with no badge? come on.//
Click to expand...

Don't know about New Yorkers, but being from Cali, I have trouble believing that the average LAPD officer really is who he says he is. I know for a fact I'd walk away if some dude without a badge tried to talk to me simply by saying he's a cop. This guy acted way too patiently given the circumstance.
 
WCH said:
I already said the officer should have proxuced a badge but, am I going to shoot hkm? Hell no. Besides it was being filmed and there were many witnesses so, quit making assumptions.
Click to expand...


You didn't answer the question.



You would let some dude without a badge put you in handcuffs?
 
Hatuey said:
He gave the guy an opportunity to leave, when he wasn't trespassing or doing anything wrong? Are... are.. you being serious? Or is this a joke? I didn't know we needed police permission to stand in a parking lot and drink ice tea.
Click to expand...

It was a liqueur store parking lot so the cop did have the right to suspect. It would be tresspassing to consume in that lot.
 
WCH said:
It was a liqueur store parking lot so the cop did have the right to suspect. It would be tresspassing to consume in that lot.
Click to expand...

Charges were dismissed, due to the fact the judge believe the cop had no probable cause, so you are, wrong.
 
WCH said:
It was a liqueur store parking lot so the cop did have the right to suspect. It would be tresspassing to consume in that lot.
Click to expand...

:rofl ... WHAT? It's almost like facts of the case don't matter to you. The OP is about the fact that this man was arrested for absurd reasons and these reasons weren't good enough to justify the cop's actions. There was no trespassing.
 
Hatuey said:
This is where the logical progression of giving so much power to cops leads. First, we are told to cooperate with cops in uniforms. Okay, done. Then, it's guys in civilian clothes flashing a badge. Now, it's guys who don't even need to flash a badge.
Click to expand...

My first experience with cops was 4 undercover guys dressed like hippies knocking on my door at 3am. They showed a flash of a document and a badge but, I had been asleep so it could having been anyone. (Note to self don't answer so quickly these days)

I'm playing devil's advocate here
.
 
Hatuey said:
:rofl ... WHAT? It's almost like facts of the case don't matter to you. The OP is about the fact that this man was arrested for absurd reasons and these reasons weren't good enough to justify the cop's actions. There was no trespassing.
Click to expand...

If there would have been alcohol in that iced tea, it would have been trespass.
 
"The Police Acted Stupidly"
 
WCH said:
My first experience with cops was 4 undercover guys dressed like hippies knocking on my door at 3am. They showed a flash of a document and a badge but, I had been asleep so it could having been anyone. (Note to self don't answer so quickly these days)
Click to expand...

Well, that's great for you if you opened. I wouldn't have. Call me crazy. I don't open the door for 4 people in the middle of the night.

I'm playing devil's advocate here.
Click to expand...

That's the new word for apologist?
 
WCH said:
If there would have been alcohol in that iced tea, it would have been trespass.
Click to expand...

Yes, and if I had wheels for feet you could call me a bicycle and ride me like a lowrider. However, I don't and he didn't have alcohol, so there was no trespassing.
 
Hatuey said:
Yes, and if I had wheels for feet you could call me a bicycle and ride me like a lowrider. However, I don't and he didn't have alcohol, so there was no trespassing.
Click to expand...
How did the cop know that? He was alcohol enforcement...that's what they do.
 
WCH said:
It was a liqueur store parking lot so the cop did have the right to suspect. It would be tresspassing to consume in that lot.
Click to expand...

Really? So anyone walking past or near a liquor store who happens to drinking something in a can a bottle is giving reasonable suspicion for a stop? I seriously do not think so. And the judge agreed.
 
WCH said:
How did the cop know that? He was alcohol enforcement...that's what they do.
Click to expand...

That's the entire point of this thread. That a cop shouldn't get to arrest you because of what he doesn't know. Cops don't know if the guy sitting next to me is a serial killer. Should he be arrested next time he goes shopping for kitchen knives?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Jude said he didn't have probable cause.
Click to expand...

If you are going to do that at least get it right.

The judge stated there was no reasonable suspicion for the stop.
Didn't say anything about Probable Cause.

And no... they aren't the same thing.
 
Caine said:
If you are going to do that at least get it right.

The judge stated there was no reasonable suspicion for the stop.
Didn't say anything about Probable Cause.

And no... they aren't the same thing.
Click to expand...





lol, I had to at least give you something to argue over on this one. ;)



yes, I also no about contact, detainment arrest.

Reasonable suspicion is whats needed for detainment, mirite?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
lol, I had to at least give you something to argue over on this one. ;)



yes, I also no about contact, detainment arrest.

Reasonable suspicion is whats needed for detainment, mirite?
Click to expand...

Yes.
And because the reasoning behind the detention from its start was lacking in "reasonableness", the entirety of the situation is thrown out in the eyes of the court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom